Doc

That particular one sentence should eventually account for more and bigger bucks even if there was no AR rules in place. Simply the fact that less pressure should mean smaller harvests. Smaller harvests should result in more deer getting older and bigger. Of course if AR are in place, it will get total credit for the bigger and older bucks. It's kind of like growing bigger bucks by simply not hunting them as much ...... lol.

Oh, you've got to have the DMP system for sure or this state would be in one hell of a mess. But the limit of one buck per season is something I still haven't found a down-side to. Doc

First of all, I doubt that is that case in all 40 states, but no, I didn't know that. But if we ever get a B/O law in NYS I hope that in some form that is a part of it. Whether you include non-hunters or not would still have to be debated, but I wouldn't automatically rule it out without a whole lot of careful discussion. My guess would be that that stipulation is required to apportion liability as contributory negligence (probably for reasons of lawsuits). Of course you would have to examine the details of that stipulation of the law to see exactly what that means. I doubt that it means that the one being shot is going to be receiving a ticket.

yeah, actually I do shoot some pretty old ammo, but whatever I check the shotgun out with, thats the same batch that I hunt with, so I feel pretty secure. It is stored in a pretty good environment so there is no deterioration. Also, for small game I am still using shotshells that I reloaded about 20+ years ago, and have never had a problem. Did I ever mention that I am one cheap son-of-a-gun?

Now that has to be a schedule that seriously cuts into hunting and fishing time. Doc

Even a blind squirrell finds an acorn occasionally ...... lol. I think the assessment of the herd size varies depending on what chunk of 8N you hunt. Heck, I even see big differences according to what part of town I hunt. Also when you start listening to all the comments, you will hear every variation you can imagine. The funny part is that they are probably all correct depending on what piece of property they hunt. So, I try to stay away from commenting on the state of the herd throughout any WMU. Let's face it, I don't hunt a very big part of it. So quite often, it will seem likethey are messing up, and maybe they are or maybe I'm just aren't seeing the bigger picture across the entire WMU. However, that still doesn't keep me from engaging in the favorite pastime of hunters ...... poking at the DEC Doc

I have had that happen to me where I accidently found myself in the middle of a big drive. Talk about an uneasy, uncomfortable feeling. None of those guys knew I was in there. All I could do was to hunker down on the backside of a big tree and hope there were no deer anywhere in the vicinity. On the other hand, I have also been the accidental beneficiary of one drive where the deer squirted out the side and ran right up the hill to me while I watched the whole thing from the hillside. I got a nice doe that way standing at 25 yards. And no, I didn't offer to share any of the meat with those guys ..... lol Doc

Ok, I agree that the doe part of that proposal needs to go, but the idea of a one buck per season might have some merit. Hunters would tend to make it a "good one", hence the defacto AR. And yet if a person hunted in an area where the population was quite low, or some other circumstance made a harvest unlikely, the ability to take whatever is available would still exist. What would be the down-side to that? Is there a down-side? Doc

That's funny because I have had that happen to me quite a few times. I will simply fixate on that one little twig and it will bug me until I go out there and remove it, even if I wind up stinking up my whole set-up or making noise at some critical time. I guess a couple of nasty incidents regarding tiny obstacles causing missed deer must have traumatized me to the point where I just can't help myself ..... ;D Doc

Are we seriously saying that blaze orange will take us to a "police state"? Is that what all this fear of blaze orange is all about? Is this perhaps the slippery slope that someday will lead to mandated government uniforms? I honestly have a real problem with that level of paranoia. I hate to be so darn sarcastic because I do understand that these things are serious issues to some people but come on, let's reserve all the conspiracy talk for subjects that deserve it (and there are many). I understand your point about the low percentages of hunters that wear B/O in Oregon. I'm not sure whether that means that the stats are flawed or whether the wording in this report is flawed, but obviously something is not right. What I will say is that if it is true that only 15% - 25% of the hunters there wear B/O, they really do have a serious problem and have a much greater need for a blaze orange law than we do. I also noticed a pretty important question/answer statement that you failed to highlight: That's a pretty powerful statement that certainly shows no hesitation or ambiguity. Probably is not something to be passed over or ignored. Look, I am not going to defend some study that I have never seen before, in a state that I know nothing about, but I am not surprised that the issue is coming up there as it appears to be the prudent thing to do as 40 (my number of 37 apparently has quickly become out of date) other states will attest to. I'm inclined to believe that all those states probably aren't wrong and it is likely just a matter of time before the rest wise up and take the obvious correct steps of mandating some level of blaze orange requirement. Further, I have no fears that such laws in those 40 states and whatever additional states in the future, will lead to a police state, or have the storm troopers banging on our door. I see some real concerns that regard real government misuse, and a blaze orange law doesn't even show up as a blip on any list of those sorts of things. There may be some real arguments against B/O that I have not heard yet, but the one argument that has the least merit is government abuse and denial of personal freedoms. Doc

Bubba.......How far back do you want to go? maybe to the colonial days....lol. And what was the point of your suggestion again? I honestly have no clue what it is that you are babbling about most of the time and I suppose I probably shouldn't be wasting a whole lot of time trying to figure it out. But I always hold out the hope that somewhere buried deep in all that ranting nonsense is some kind of real point that has something to do with the discussion. I think I am wrong on that. By the way, never mind your failing memory, it appears you have a bigger problem simply reading. You might want to go back and actually read that statement about the 1992 safety campaign. Maybe on a second or third or fourth stab at it, the words blaze orange might actually register in your brain. Give it a try Bubba ...... I know it is a tough sentence for you, but I know you can do it.....lol. Look, I'm not sure just how long I can continue to try to have a discussion with you. I seriously doubt that you have any intention of actually discussing anything. And certainly there has to only be a few people on this earth that can actually tell what direction all your pointless raving is heading, so I am coming to the conclusion that it is foolish to try. Doc

I'm sorry to see how crazy you seem to react in the face of actual facts and numbers. If I had known you would turn into a raving looney, I wouldn't have embarrassed you with actual data. Doc

Lol.... As long as hunters believe they can buy success at deer hunting, there will always be people who will promise that they can buy it from them. It just irritates me that I never had the gumption to get in on the action. ;D Doc

Ha-ha ..... that's funny. The law is for minors only??? I guess once you reach a certain age nobody cares whether you get shot or not.....lol. Well, they are one step closer to the other 37 states that actually show a little common sense and mandate B/O during their deer seasons. It takes a while to get past all the stubborness and all the conspiracy nuts that see B/O as the gateway to citizen slavery, but eventually, the stats begin to be something that simply can't be denied or ignored.

Make the most of your free time. I know that these days that time away from work is getting to be pretty darn sparce. I'm not sure what your situation is like, but before I retired, there were years of downsizing, but the jobs didn't really go away. They just became added burdens on those that were left. Of course this resulted in constant overtime (unfortunately, this mandatory OT was not paid). I was lucky and had complete flexibility in my hours. So I began at 4:00 am and was able to still salvage a piece of the day for my hunting activities. However it became a constant fight for vacation days, and the weekends were only half available. When they started that nonsense, I began seriously thinking about retirement. So when you talk about "free time", I recognize just how valuable that can be. Doc

Honest to gosh, I hate to be such a big baby, but that darn 12 guage hurts. Funny thing is that when I'm shooting at a deer I never have felt any recoil at all. But lay that sucker on a bench and shoot more than 5 shots and I'll guarantee a black and blue spot on my shoulder. :-[ That doesn't make a guy want to target practice with the dang thing. That's one of the primary reasons that I was hoping that Ontario County would get that rifle bill passed. I was already picturing a nice .243 that I could shoot all day without getting beat up. Oh well maybe next year. Doc

All right, let's go back in time without using the cloudy vision of aging and faulty memories and see how it really was: "From 1965 to 1994, reported hunting injuries in New York decreased steadily from 157 (22.3 injuries per 100,000 licensed hunters) to 52 (7.2) and from 11 deaths to one death. In 1991, DEC reviewed hunting-injury reports and concluded that most hunting injuries were associated with violations of basic firearms safety rules. DEC also found that most hunters who were injured as the result of being "mistaken for game" or "in line of fire" were not wearing hunter orange at the time of injury ." "In 1992, DEC initiated a campaign in New York to promote basic firearms safety and the use of hunter orange clothing through hunter education courses, meetings with hunter organizations, and advertisements in hunting literature. During 1992-1995, following the initiation of this safety promotion campaign, the average annual injury rate decreased 27% compared with the rate during 1988-1991." This info only takes you up to 1995 and I think anybody who has been paying even a little attention knows that the most recent years have been setting new safety records. Yes, relatively speaking "carnage" may not really be too strong a term when you actually look at the facts instead of relying on old fond but failing memories. Doc

I didn't go back through this thread to see if I may have missed any, but were there any replies from anyone who regularly target practices with their slug-gun ...... lol. I think the consensus was that it gets pulled out just before season and a few shots are fired to ensure that nothing has moved. I think anything more would require periodic surgical shoulder replacements every few years ;D

Yes, it's kind of like the advise not to ever argue politics or religion ...... lol. I don't completely agree with applying that to hunting ethics because I always hold out the hope that reasonable people can discuss anything reasonably, but I'll admit that I have seen evidence that such discussions can be difficult . However, I must say that I have a whole lot more respect for someone who is not afraid to speak up regarding his convictions than those that are afraid of how those convictions will be received. I always look at an individual's ethical comments as simply one data point that when considered together with all the others, arrives at a near perfect solution. If they keep those ethical views to themselves, they benefit no one and are nearly worthless. Culvercreek hunt club noted that ethics can occasionally be changed over time (even those that are thoroughly entrenched in one's being), and I think that is possibly true. However, they will never change, evolve, or spread if no one is willing to discuss them. The fact is that each generation has a duty to pass on whatever ethical concerns and ideals to the generations following them. How does that ever happen if everyone is afraid to discuss such thoughts? I really don't want a future of hunters whose actions are only ruled by laws. I don't want them to have to rely on the opinions of some legislators to tell them right from wrong. Yes, I want them to abide by the laws, but I also want them to recognize when the laws have failed a situation. We all know that the legal system falls far short of covering all situations, and we also are aware that many times the legal system arrives at incorrect solutions. Arming future hunters with the ability to rely on an internal system of ethical judgement on right and wrong is a much more reassuring way to secure and safeguard the principles of hunting. But that ethical system does not evolve in a vacuum. And speaking of the legal system, I think it's fair to say that most laws are derived from ethical concerns. How does that system ever improve, or evolve if no one is willing to discuss the ethical concerns that new or improved laws might be based on. We can all think of many examples, but let me offer just one that gets to this point. A few years back, there was an outfit that was going to offer "hunting by computer". The idea being that you would log in, pay your money, choose your animal, and when he walked in front of the rifle armed camera, you would shoot and blow the animal flat. That perversion of hunting rankled the collective ethics of the entire hunting community and new laws in several states were authored and passed to prevent that kind of thing. What if everyone had said, "We can't discuss that"? And finally, you are right when you say that we have to "Accept that others may have different beliefs" but that does not mean that we have to mute our own. Yes, in the end, if you are not all that persuasive, you will have to accept that they still have different beliefs and then you will have to live with that. But at least you will have had your say and had the courage to put your convictions on record. And who knows how many others you may have swayed in the process.

I believe we all have that tendency. I remember a time when my arrow made it all of 5 of the ten feet to a deer because of a little branch that I was sure would never be in the way. I tend to get into that clear-cut mode myself now. However, I tend to do the massacre about a year in advance so that I don't have to do anything too obvious in the same year that I'm going to use the stand. Doc

That reminds me of a few years ago when I noticed a hunter standing over in the state field about 200 feet from my house. I went over to gently remind him of the 500 foot rule regarding discharge of weapons, and almost fell over from the smell of whiskey. I took one look at those bloodshot eyes and listened to the slurred speech and noticed the way he wobbled around just trying to stay upright and my concern changed from his proximity to the house to his ability to safely negotiate his way back to his car as well as what he would do if he ever did find his car. I was beginning to try to figure out how to get this guy some help when he assured me that he had a son that was coming along shortly. As a matter of fact, while we stood there, his son did step out in the field. That is about as drunk as I have ever seen anyone who was still conscious, and it was one scary thing. I had a little safety pep-talk with the son and advised him that this sort of thing could wind up as a pretty terrible tragedy. I also suggested that the son immediately pull the slugs out of his father's shotgun, which he did. There was no point in trying to talk to the father because he didn't even have any idea where he was and what he was doing. I couldn't help but wonder what could have happened if he had wound up wandering around the water falls and gorge up behind the house. So yes, just like anything else, we do have participants that cannot or will not lay off the booze, and far too many of them that don't realize the danger of mixing alcohol with hunting. Doc

Trying real hard not to get too far off-topic on this, let me try to explain exactly what I feel is the difference between an opinion and ethics. The definition of an opinion is: "a belief or judgement which falls short of absolute conviction". I also believe further that opinions are transient and negotiable and subject to change through discussion. Ethics on the other hand is a moral code that is permanently engrained from a lifetime of social experience, and is something pretty fundamental that guides us in the way that we conduct our lives. A person's ethics do not "fall short of absolute conviction". So we really can't use the terms interchangeably ..... well we can, but it is not correct. It's kind of like the principles of fair chase. Those aren't opinions but fall into a category of an ethical code of hunting. And that also is exactly what I think needs to remain in hunters minds. So if Nugent was trying to say that hunting should exist without any ethical considerations, that is specifically what I would find wrong with his message. By the way I taped the program from 10:00 this morning. It was Deer and Deer Hunting alright, but they apparently have moved on to another episode. Too bad because I really was interested in what this guy had to say about ethics in hunting. It's one of my pet subjects primarily because I am constantly hearing this theme that it is ethics in hunting that is causing all the dischord in the hunting community. That's not a real popular view with me. To me it is the ethical base that hunting is built on and the fact that just about every tiny aspect of how hunting is conducted is constantly scrutinized and discussed with ethics in mind that strengthens the activity. Doc

I kind of wonder if the proliferation of hawks isn't responsible for the scarcity of grouse and other game birds. Doc

While I am not a huge fan of drives, I do have to admit that back in the days of the huge drives, the deer were kept moving. Now-a-days, it seems that everybody just picks out a favorite tree in the woods and sits there like a lump all day. Meanwhile the deer quickly figure out that if they move they get shot at, so they go into a hunker-down mode, and eventually everyone is just sitting there in the woods without moving an inch ....... hunters and deer. It used to be that they were not allowed to just sit in one spot all day. Some drivers (or still hunters) would come through and get them up on their feet again.