Doc

I suppose that one thing to keep in mind is there most likely is not one area where 100% of the 1.5 year olds are harvested. We like to say that but I doubt that ever really happens. It is also true that the yearling buck you let walk is unlikely to be the one you will be hunting in the future. So even if you could successfully wipe out every 1.5 yr old on your property, their will be another crop of them that come wandering onto your land to set up house-keeping. And they will likely come from your AR practicing neighbor who let them all walk. I don't know .... some of this is really starting to get a bit far out into the theoretical now. There seems to be an awful lot of "if you do this then maybe that will happen" going on here .... . All I can say is ...... ???

Ok, I solved the mystery and the news is not good. I substituted the 585 area code for the 716 and got ahold of the club secretary. They are still organized but just barely. They dropped NFAA affiliation because they could not get anyone to show up for tournaments. They are now down to about 5 active members and it didn't sound like there was any kind of tournament activity. Just a summer weekly get-together and a bit of shooting. What a shame. We used to be a huge lively organization with a great well maintained challenging course and clubhouse. It was sad to hear that they are all but defunct now. We had some great times there and a lot of friends. I guess I'll drop over some Wednesday next summer and see who's left.

I found all that info in one of the NYB newsletters or on their web site where they listed their supporters. However, I don't believe any of that is current. Avon had their area code changed from 716 to 585 quite a few years ago so I'm pretty sure that that info is outdated.

I have never been one to change just for the sake of changing, so I guess I like to have some reason to consider blowing up the hunting seasons. I haven't really heard one yet that I truly believe in. But I will admit that it is fun to listen to what others think. As far as the split season is concerned, I'm not really sure what that is supposed to accomplish.

Well, I'm not going to brag about how little snow we've had this year, or make a big thing about the fact that I have not yet had to plow the driveway even once. But so far, this is one of the better winters that I have ever had. There are heavy snowfall totals all around me but up to this point, the lake effect snow plumes from both Ontario and Erie have missed me. I hope I haven't jinxed myself now ??? Doc

I have a hard time trying to predict what all would be positives or negatives in some of these schemes. It's not my profession. What I can say is that I don't have any serious arguments with what is in place now. That doesn't mean that everything is perfect. That only means that from a laymans point of view, I have no facts to show that what is in place is wrong. Doc

It always amazes me how it is possible to manage a herd of deer without ever really knowing the size of it. When we say that the herd size is "unimportant", I have to wonder exactly how we could have any idea when it is "right-sized". Isn't raw quantity kind of a basic part of that management? Yes I know that we go through all kinds of statistical mumbo-jumbo each year with each new result being cumulatively built on, and impacted by, decades old annual results arrived at by the same means. We even come up with statewide numbers to serve as some sort of bogus measuring stick of management success. But none of it is ever subjected to on-the-ground real verification. I understand the economic difficulties of such verification (especially in these years of state fiscal crisis). But I don't believe I will ever be able to consider such mathmatical juggling to have a whole lot of credibility until such time as they make some periodic attempts at some crude version of observed verifications of their statistical results. And yes I have heard all about the statistical model verifications by "expert statisticians", but that is not the kind of verification that I am talking about. I don't care if their math is correct. I am more concerned with whether the statistics are turning out credibility in actual useable results. I have seen periods of both extremes of mismanagement (over-population and under-population) as have we all, and these have been admitted to by the DEC so I know it is not flawless. When we see examples of such management gone awry it seems to me that verification is a reasonable thing to demand if any part of the system is to be believed. Yeah, I know it all sounds like some version of paranoia, but I really do have difficulties with great amounts of mathmatical fancy footwork. If it always worked out well, I guess I would have a need to ever question it ....... but it doesn't.

It seems that some of you have not figured out that the DEC only takes one of the seasons seriously when it comes to population control. There is only one weapon that can consistantly cut populations when they deem it necessary to do so, or that can build populations through cuts in antlerless permits when that action is deemed necessary. Other than unique urban situations (where there is no choice) population control is not all that effective with bows, or muzzleloaders, or crossbows. Those seasons are niche or novelty seasons that the DEC does not view as serious controls for populations. The real management tool is the antlerless permit in the hands of the gunner. I honestly don't believe that the DEC will ever entertain cuts in the gun season (or should they). The idea that crossbows will ever even begin to replace the productivity lost by cutting gun season length is simply not being anywhere near realistic. Their contribution will be basically insignificant. I'm sure we all have many ideas for shredding the NYS season structure, but it all further convinces me that even though crippled and financially maimed, I am oh so glad that we still have professionals at the helm making those kinds of decisions.

Things change in our lives. If your heart isn't really into riding and racing, the choice gets a whole lot more simple. Do you have a chunk of land picked out yet?

Now there is something that the animal rights groups will be showing as often as they can. What a pair of losers.

Donald Duck was the name of the mason that did my chimney on the house back in 1976.

That 16% success rate is telling. You would have thought that the success rate would be much higher. If the DEC really wanted to down size the deer herd by increasing the number of does killed they could implement more drastic measures such as doe days and mandatory killing of a doe before being able to kill a buck. I have read about the low success rates on DMPs before, and some of that may be true or flawed for various reasons, but I know from past personal observation that when the DEC decides to down-size the herd, the antlerless permit system is definitely up to the task when they decide to flood the area with DMPs. It works! Sometimes too well ..... lol.

I have never bought any bow that I didn't at least hold in my hand and draw. And most of them I actually shot before buying. If you are planning on spending limited dollars, and buying a used bow for a first one, it probably is not as important as when or if you decide to upgrade to a newer, more expensive bow. After some time shooting, you will settle in on certain things that are important to you when it comes to how a bow "handles". These are little nuances that are sort of personal choices or preferences and cannot be determined through written bow tests and advertisements in catalogs or internet sources. Also, when dealing with used bows, hands on, pre-purchase experience might allow you to look for troubles before you buy. Hairline cracks in limbs or leaning cams, or strings and cables that have not been properly maintained or are in need of replacement, as well as cosmetic problems cannot be seen in pictures. Complaining about such things after the sale and shipment may not do a whole lot of good depending on whether or not the seller agrees that the problems are really problems. Also, if at all possible, when buying a used bow, take someone along that has been shooting a while and is familiar with what some of these problems actually look like.

Sounds good to me Group hug? Stand back!!! Don't you be touching me!

I think they're getting ready to declare "global cooling" so that they have both bases covered.

Sounds good to me

I am having a heck of a time turning a copy of my database into an empty one that anyone can use. When I take large gobs of data out so that all new input can be entered, the formulas seem to get a bit confused ...... no actually they have a melt-down. Excel doesn't like formulas that result in infinity, and when you turn the denominator into zero by eliminating the info, that's exactly what happens. At least that's what I have concluded from some of my attempts. I also have some "read-only" protections on the spreadsheet that don't show up until I upload it to this forum. So I have that to deal with also. I haven't given up, but it just is not turning out as simple a task as I thought it would be.

Would you rather I continue to expose your reading comprehension problem. I thought I would give you a break. ;D

Let me see what I can do. With some work, I maybe can take a copy of my log, gut out the input, and attach it to a message here. It might be worth a try. Of course whenever I try these kinds of things, I always wind up with compatibility problems between my older versions of Excel and the versions that others are using. For one thing, all my macros are written in the old macro language instead of Visual Basic. My version of Excel has no problem with that, but other versions may. I'll see what I can do. If it doesn't work, then so be it. Let me do a quick test with another spreadsheet and see how it all reacts. Doc

;D

Not really any point to even trying to talk to you is there? You can't even read straight forward English sentences and understand what is being said. It's too bad because it kind of wrecks whatever credibility you may have ever had.

There is no question that if you place enough restrictions on buck harvests, you will most likely have more bucks. Anytime you take opportunities away from hunters, you wind up with more deer and some percentage of those will be bucks. So yes, shut down the harvest in any way you want, and you will have more bucks and absolutely some of those will have to get older. AR fits the bill for reducing hunter opportunities. Is that what we want to do? ..... remove hunter opportunities? I have a hard time with anything that eliminates hunter opportunities for any reason other than balancing the herd with available habitat.

Now see, a day on the ice where I am getting that kind of action would make me a whole lot more enthusiastic about ice fishing. In fact, this past summer I ran into a guy that I used to work with who said he would be giving me a call some time this winter to do a little perch fishing through the ice. Who knows maybe I'll become a fan of ice fishing. If we run into the kind of luck that you obviously did, I'll guarantee I'll be making it a regular activity.....lol. Doc

Because I am off all week & don't have to go anywhere.... I love snow, don't mind shoveling / snow blowing... I wish I was a snowmobiler, maybe down the road Those that are looking forward to a day or two off from work because of snow-days ...... I can understand that. Snowmobilers, skiers and snow-shoers, I can understand that. Just enjoying snow because it's snow? ...... That's a little harder to understand . At any rate, we certainly live in the right state for snow lovers. We get some annual accumulations in several parts of the state that are the envy of snow lovers all over the country....lol.

I don't know. maybe there are a lot of things that would make big improvements to deer hunting here in NYS. Probably is, but I haven't seen any of them in this thread. I know we all think we know a lot more than the DEC (it's too bad those guys wasted all those years in school) and we are all convinced that they don't know what they are doing, and we all think that improvement is not taking place unless we totally uproot everything and place all kinds of restrictions everywhere and shorten this guy's season and stand that guy's season on it's head and just work like crazy to irritate as many hunters as possible. At least that is what it appears as I review all the stuff in this thread and a few others. It looks like we are all willing to spread the pain to all aspects of hunting, but every suggestion certainly does seem to involve spreading pain.....lol. I'm kind of the opinion that things are pretty good as they are. Let the DEC do a little tweak here and a little tweak there as they deem necessary and then just go hunting. What's wrong with that. They don't have any money to implement any big changes anyway even if we did all agree as to what changes were necessary (which we don't). So we can all pretend to be experts if we want since none of it will ever get implemented anyway and I guess there is no real harm in that .... ;D