Doc

In the words of that great American, Rodney King, "Can't we all just get along" ..... Lol. Seriously, I have not seen anything on this forum or any other hunting forums that would really be of any use to the anti-hunting groups that they don't already have the ability to come up with themselves, with one huge exception. That exception being those posts that try to convince hunters not to be organized. Probably one of the things that make it extremely easy for animal-rights wackos to push legislation and force referendums, and create public messages designed to change minds of those voters that are on the fence about hunting, is the fact that they are highly organized and financed and we are pretty much totally disorganized and I have seen topics on these forums (more so on this site's predecessor) devoted to convincing other hunters not to become organized. Whether we are for or against AR or crossbows, or high fences, food plots, baiting, or whatever, that is all insignificant and of little notice or use to anti-hunting groups. However, if you can successfully turn back membership to hunting organizations, you are doing their work for them. The biggest thing that animal rights groups fear the most is sportsmen who have banded together for political clout and solidarity. It's a death knell to them. I often wonder just what our firearms picture would look like today in the U.S. if it were not for the NRA. And yet I recall a debate on this forum's forerunner that had more hunters and gun owners than I would ever have expected criticizing the NRA and hawking all the reasons why people should not belong. That's the sort of thing that can do direct harm to hunting and gun ownership, not whether we argue about relatively minor subjects like crossbows and AR and such. Actually discussions of those kinds of things are useful as we sort out the nature of the sport for ourselves and among ourselves. Doc

She admits that she has her own individual fears about the added range, but also claims to have found support for her opposition among residents of her township. Also, according to the vote, she is not alone in the southern Ontario township supervisors, In fact I believe it was unanimous opposition among all the supervisors in the affected area. I must admit that I have mixed feelings also on the issue. I have two opinions. One as a hunter, and another as a landowner whose house sits at the end of a 200 Yard state field with a not very substantial hedgerow between us.....lol. I sure would love to ditch that shoulder masher 12 guage and pick up something like a .243 that I could target practice with all day and then go deer hunting with, enjoying the added pin-point accuracy. But I keep looking over at that hedgerow, remembering how many times over the past decades that I have watched deer sneaking off the hill headed toward the thickets at the bottom that have used that hedge as their route. So either way, I will wind up disappointed. However, I won't have anyone to be mad at because I understand both positions. Doc

We've been losing ash trees for quite a few years. It's very unusual to see one that is 10" in diameter. They still seem to propagate and grow for a number of years, but then just die. It has not been this borer that has killed them either because there are none of those trails under the bark or the "D" shaped holes. Doc

Yeah, you're right. You can put any spin on it you want. But I guess the numbers cannot be spun. They simply indicate less opportunity for PA hunters. Not just among does, but also buck harvests as well. Frankly, I believe most hunters are out there to get a deer. I could be wrong but I always thought that was kind of the object of deer hunting. That may be an inconvenient fact, but are we really trying to frustrate hunters out of the sport? When buck harvests have moved back 23 years and perhaps even more, That's quite a dramatic contraction. Certainly nothing to be ignored by other states that are discussing following the same route. I have to wonder, with all these bucks not being harvested because of AR, where are all the bucks going? If they're not all growing up and eventually getting harvested, where exactly are they going? Something sure is not turning out as advertised. Doc

Interesting development in the southern Ontario County Rifle bill. I have unofficially heard that the Canadice Town Supervisor sent a letter to Governor Paterson about the county vote that indicated approval. She explained to him that while the proposal was officially passed, the actual vote was against passing the measure. The actual vote of individual supervisors was 12 to 9 against passing the proposal. So how did it get registered as an approved proposal? It turns out that Ontario County has a "weighted" vote that gives some townships a vote that counts more than others. That's based on population and is supposed to make the vote more fair in that it is based on the actual number of people that are in each township. Now here's the problem ...... The people voting against the measure were from the townships south of rts 5 & 20 which is the area that the law would pertain to, while the bigger townships to the north which would not be effected were the ones that voted for it. So it turns out that the larger towns who are not affected were able to force a law regarding local safety on the smaller towns that are actually affected. Well, this is where the plot thickens .... lol. The Canadice Town Supervisor sent a letter to the Governor laying this whole scenario out. Will it change anything? ..... Don't know. Only time will tell, but the rifle bill is not a done-deal in Ontario County. So I'm still not running right out just yet and buying a shiny new deer rifle. This bill is turning into a real comedy with more twists and turns that any work of fiction could ever conjure up. Doc

Interesting development in the southern Ontario County Rifle bill. I have unofficially heard that the Canadice Town Supervisor sent a letter to Governor Paterson about the county vote that indicated approval. She explained to him that while the proposal was officially passed, the actual vote was against passing the measure. The actual vote of individual supervisors was 12 to 9 against passing the proposal. So how did it get registered as an approved proposal? It turns out that Ontario County has a "weighted" that gives some townships a vote that counts more than others. That's based on population and is supposed to make the vote more fair in that it is based on the actual number of people that are in each township. Now here's the problem ...... The people voting against the measure were from the townships south of rts 5 & 20 which is the area that the law would pertain to, while the bigger townships to the north which would not be effected were the ones that voted for it. So it turns out that the larger towns who are not affected were able to force a law regarding local safety on the smaller towns that are actually affected. Well, this is where the plot thickens .... lol. The Canadice Town Supervisor sent a letter to the Governor laying this whole scenario out. Will it change anything? ..... Don't know. Only time will tell, but the rifle bill is not a done-deal in Ontario County. So I'm still not running right out just yet and buying a shiny new deer rifle. Doc

Check this quote out: "The 308,920 deer bagged reflected an 8 percent decline from the previous year. The buck kill — 108,330 — was the lowest recorded since the agency began its present system of estimating harvests in 1986." I have heard loud howls coming out of the Keystone State about miserable doe scarcity, but now they have severe declines in buck harvests too? I have to wonder just what is so wonderful about a system that produces these results. Is this the shining example of AR? It sounds ok if you want to kill hunting. Doc

For gosh sakes, don't homeowners have any rights to an expectation of privacy? What do you all want to do set up a stand where you can look into their living room 9or worse). Good grief. maybe you want to sit on their porch and wait for the deer to come out in their yard. Doc

There have been a lot of great experiences that rank right up there, but the most exciting has to be the time a huge doe broke off the trail I was watching and came straight over to the big oak I was standing behind. I mean, she was right on the other side, walking around the tree. I kept circling the tree trying not to let her catch up with me. finally she came to the folding stool that I had been sitting on and the pack that I left behind when this dance started. She bolted off about 5 yards and stopped. I was already at full draw, so I just let the arrow go. I got her. Boy was I hyped up. It's a wonder I even made the shot, I was shaking so bad. Doc

Aha!! There you go .... maybe one of them was the guide. Maybe the guide is the one who actually set the bait out ..... maybe. Ok, Uncle Ted is exhonerated. He probably didn't even know there was any bait there. Maybe. Anybody believe that one?

Well, that's no fun! Maybe you just have to be real careful. ;D

If the guide knew what was going on, he should be charged as well. I don't know whether their state law accomodates that, but I see him as an accomplice...... If he was aware. Of course, after he drops a client off at the stand, he really doesn't know who is doing what. It's really not clear who was baiting the site, but I'll bet that the guide probably kept the site baited for his clients. Bait usually is a habitual thing for it to be effective ...... right? Doc

Actually, from an archery standpoint it's nice to be able to shoot right next to houses. It comes in real handy when that deer refuses to move out from behind that big rose-of-sharon bush.You can bank the shot off the house and get him that way. ;D

Sorry smiley, I didn't mean to point out the obvious. Your just such a happy little agreeable fellow all the time ....... lol.

I don't know all the details of Rothaar's situation. I only know that he was caught in an illegal act, convicted of that, and poof..... we don't hear of him anymore. I'm sure that we will hear all kinds of justifications of Nugents legal woes, in fact we already have heard some. But as far as I am concerned his public status probably has more to do with the origin of his illegal acts than any kind of justifications. These guys that turn their passions for hunting into their income, do walk a different path, and their extra scrutiny and tighter requirements for legal purity are generally justified because they are the ones that put a public face to hunting and warranted or not, they do become ambassadors for the sport and the people in it. As far as Nugent's guitar playing capabilities, he may be very good at what he does. I simply don't like what he does ..... ;D . His era signalled the end of rock and roll for me. I do not recall hearing anything about him prior to R&R taking a turn toward that shrieky, screaming, acid rock, crap, so I have no fond memories of him at a better time. And of course that is all just personal preference, but I mention all that by way of explaining that he holds no star or celebrity status with me. So I repeat: You caught him ...... Now fry him. Just like anybody else. Doc

My-my ..... getting a bit testy aren't we? Starting to resort to the old name-calling trick again, I see. It's almost guaranteed on these crossbow topics. I always try to figure out just how many responses will go by before all civility is lost. We did pretty good on this one. ;D

Sometimes it happens ..... lol. I'll try not to make a habit out of it. ;D Doc

I just heard on the TV that pork prices are up and going higher ..... Faster than other kinds of meat. Sounds like it might make some sense to forget about these little outfits here in the northeast and head for the deep south with a good sized trailer, and fill it up with some of the hogs they have running all over the place down there. might even be able to sell some of that meat back here and re-coup your costs ..... lol. Is that legal??? Doc

I have to laugh at some of these replies, because I simply can't relate to Nugent's hero status at all. It was exactly his style of music that drove me to begin listening to country music ..... lol. That chaotic screaming and shrieking with squealing notes that were never intended to come out of a guitar left me completely out of the rock scene for quite a few years. So the man has no celebrity status with me. For me this story is just about another lawbreaking poacher that happens to have hunting shows, which also aren't all that special or entertaining for me. No real controversy to any of it for me. You caught him.....now fry him. ;D End of story! Doc

It's quite a complex web of rules and regulations, but I believe it all makes sense. I'm supposing that the purpose for the "no feeding" law is aimed specifically at activities that promote "swapping spit" or other ways that deer standing in or around a pile of food my ingest wastes from each other, which of course is all aimed at major methods of disease dispersal. I'm not sure why that is so confusing to anyone. It seems logical to me that it might be unhealthy to draw animals into one exact point to eat and deposit saliva, and body wastes on the food that the next individual will be eating. Now, unless you have a food plot that is measured in a few square feet, there is no comparison at all to a pile of food or a trough full of food, or a mineral block. What is so hard to figure out about that? As far as natural occurring concentrations of food (apples, acorns, etc.), there's not a whole lot the DEC can do about that, is there? However, compounding a bad situation by allowing thousands of landownwers and homeowners to create more of an unhealthy situation doesn't make a lot of sense either. So, I'm guessing that this particular law has a whole lot more thought and common sense behind it than people are willing to give the DEC credit for. Doc

Well, here's the thing. Nugent is not the first of the hunter-heroes to break the law in a frantic effort to be able to make deadlines with successful hunting footage or articles. Remember Roger Rothaar and Noel Feather and many more. None of them should be excused, and they are just as rightfully scorned as any poacher should be. Those before Nugent have been driven off to obscurity for their crimes. Will Nugent? Time will tell.

I guess I never thought of it that way .... lol. Nature, supposedly the time perfected and evolved form of game management functions exactly opposite of QDM. Interesting observation. Doc

I'm not sure I buy into the argument that if blaze orange is made mandatory, everything that not orange is going to get blown to bits. At least I have never seen anyone actually look into that in any scientific way. I've heard the argument used before, even by our former Governor ...... Pataki, but I just don't buy it. There are a lot of other states that don't buy into it either (most of them). By the way, there is one more benefit to blaze orange that nobody mentioned on the other thread. That is that when I spot even a flicker of orange off through the woods, that is an instant signal NOT to shoot in that direction. I don't even have to see enough of the individual to make out a human form. Just a glimpse or a brief flash of that color signals that I cannot shoot in that direction. In fact it more often becomes a signal that I had better be moving on and put some distance between us. No such instant warning signal exists with someone in camo. The opposite of this has also occurred. Hunters coming in late have spotted me glowing away in my stand and turned and moved directly away. Doc

Primarily because it is no longer 1520 B.C. I suppose it's the same reason we don't use sinew for strings or stone broadheads. : By the way, I had a release back in the mid 60's long before I had a compound. And I had a peep sight and a stabilizer, and a wrist strap, and an adjustable sight as well as multi=pin sights. It's funny how people seem to think that the world of archery gadgets began only when compounds were invented. You might want to check out the Stanislaus (sp?) back tension release which is used today and was quite common back in the recurve days.

As far as sealed, gas-filled, multi optic, scopes on bows, I did see such a thing many years ago as a prototype for single distance indoor target shooting. It was basically a pistol style scope mounted rigidly as a one-position sight. It wasn't very practical and if it ever made it to the market, it sure never went over too well. All it showed was that you can stick anything on anything as long as you don't care that it really isn't suited for its purpose.....lol. The main problem is that there isn't a whole lot of real estate on a vertical bow to mount such clap-trap. You simply don't have a stock to mount all kinds of different gadgets on. That's not to say that people aren't trying. But the proof of practicality is in the successful mass marketing. For example, scopes on cross-bows are a common accessory and are often sold as part of a package. Another thing too is that you are limited in what magnification you can use because there is no practical way to bench-rest a bow, or any feasible method of mounting a bipod or monopod to a bow. This as opposed to the fact that bipods are also very common accessories for crossbows and are also included in a lot of crossbow package deals. So whatever shake and wandering that might cause problems in a high magnification scope can be solved by use of a bi-pod or even simply resting the crossbow on any horizontal surface like a log or some other feature built into a blind. That's a technique that I use with my shotgun during gun season. My ground blinds all have plenty of convenient horizontal logs built into them to serve as bench rests for steadying my gun/scope.