mike rossi

Everyone must have private land to hunt on, that they can post up, but public areas to target shoot... And meanwhile many shooting facilities are going broke or just hanging on.

NY Dove Hunting thanks Lawdwaz for his generous donation towards our advertising campaign! His contribution will be used toward our advertisement in next years NY Hunting and Trapping Regulation Guide!

Use this link to download and print out the mourning dove hunting petition form. Take this petition form to meetings, club houses, camps, stores, bait shops, National Hunting and Fishing Day, hunting expos, guns shows, etc. so that people who have limited access to the internet are able to sign... You can also print out business cards, flyers, etc... http://nydovehunting.weebly.com/printouts.html

There are two other tools on face book we describe in our article " Network Strategies". Briefly, those are the "Call To Action" and the "Create an Event". These are effective because you can directly invite people in your face book contacts. It is a little confusing when we use the "Event" function for petitions, because that is not an actual event, but most people figure it out. We are going to post these over the weekend, and I believe personal pages can also create events and possibly call to actions. Some people just don't read their feed or pay more attention when they are contacted directly. Your feed only goes out to 7% of your subscribers anyway, not everyone. So if you have 1,000 followers, your posts only reach 70 people... If you pay face book, which we did, your posts would reach about 50% of your subscribers, so on a 1,000 you reach 500. The events/call to action although time consuming, allows you to reach everyone. We are also creating hard copy petition forms and other material such as business cards and information brochures that can be printed right off of our website. To return the completed petition forms we ask you to contact us through our website and tell you were to send them. When the link for print out material is up, we will announce it. Another thing: There are a lot of doves around right now. Very shortly, they will be nesting and much less visible. Now is a good time to getting others to notice how many doves are around the state. We started a migration map, similar to the waterfowl migration map of DU and the woodcock migration map of the RGS; but the project was more time consuming then we thought, so we put that off for later. Never the less, make notes, even shoot film and video for the naysayers... The main project we are working on right now is our "National Hunting and Fishing Day Strategy". We will do our best for this upcoming September, but we don't expect this to be optimal the first year or so. We need a lot of cooperation with this effort as well, because it requires people to be physically present state-wide. There are only so much expense we can eat as well. However, 90% of what can be done with money can be done with work, never the less, we cannot do all the work either.

I just signed it and shared it. Everyone should, I thought hunters stick together? I think there are a variety of charges which can be brought in this one besides the minor one that was. I wonder how authorities would have treated this if this guy was hunting with his children, seeing this happen to what is a family pet, therefore a member of the family.

There always is a few "traditionalists" that hang on in any form of hunting. However,the problem is when that pool of people becomes small and under-represented and therefore targeted by the antis. When the antis can argue that such an activity is not efficient and inhumane as they have argued against bow hunting in the seventies and early eighties they hone in on it more and put it on the top of their agenda. Chant how hunters stick together all you want, but truth is that the less popular forms of hunting are on the bottom of the pro-hunting agenda. Let me map it out for you: Same activity on the top of the antis agenda is on the bottom of the pro-hunting agenda, what happens? Along that paradigm it is not hard to imagine traditional bow hunting disappearing. Another thing I can imagine for the future is traditional bow hunting being justified by the DEC for use with 50 yard setbacks, Something like, we need to get at the overpopulated deer taking refuge close to homes and buildings...

Is this the updated website for a team: http://devel.ankeroutfitters.com/ While I was at it I found an old HT premium online, which is a source of GSP contacts or to get into the LI GSP club: http://www.ligspc.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/3621_001-2.pdf

We do not want to handle money at this time, but we eventually might set one of those up. At this point, we are not anticipating advertising beyond the reg. guide and face book. The reg. guide ad is expensive, and the more we get, the bigger the ad we can run. If we get the people, there will be expenses to go to shows, particularly the National Hunting and Fishing Day events in September throughout the state in NY. We also would like representatives at those events to wear a hat and shirt. We already designed the shirts, and they are for sale to others as well. If we do not make ground the next year, we again would advertise in the reg, guide, face book, and go to the September NHFD events, the following year. And then every year thereafter, for as long as it takes. So, there may be reoccurring costs. The more people who push this within their own networks, the less need to advertise of course. That is beginning to improve, more people are spreading the word. Here is that link to buy the shirts: http://teespring.com/stores/NYDoveHuntingApparel

Thank you Culver Creek HC and Greater Rochester Southern Tier Branch of QDMA for helping to cover part of the NY Dove Hunting ad that will be coming out in the 2015-16 NYS DEC Hunting & Trapping Regulation Guide. The guide reaches 600,000 NY hunters and we are optimistic this advertising will make a large difference. https://www.facebook.com/GRSTQDMA Thank you 2- Rochester QDMA.bmp

Besides the food movement, other sources of new people are target shooters who do not hunt; and people who do not hunt but participate in hunting dog events such as tests and trials. More of you on here can relate better to the people at the range who do not hunt than can relate to the dog events. Although I do not have the exact numbers, hunt test and field trial entrees number well into the thousands every year, with many, perhaps most, of the participants being persons who have never hunted.

Yes. We would have to start talking to the stores or corporate offices to get the ok. We would also need to locate as many NHFD events as we can, and make whatever arrangements are necessary. It would be great if we could get many people at these events throughout the entire state. And, if we still don't get enough signatures, we can do it the following year, and then the following, as long as it takes... I see you indeed signed the petition, and I thank you, but you are introducing a Red Herring into this post. Given the importance and difficulty of engaging hunters in signing the petition and getting this NHFD project organized, I am going to refer you to our website which has figures on the costs of the pheasant program which disprove arguments against it. The article also explains how the pheasant program adds to conservation funding and general economic activity, not the vice verse. We also describe on our website how hunters in the state of NJ were tricked into giving up their bobwhite (quail) season for the promise of a dove season, which never happened. Now, it would be even more difficult to reinstate their quail season then a dove season, given the conservation status of both birds. Every once in a while somebody suggests that NY should close its rail hunting season in a "trade" for a dove season. I don't think it is necessary to get into detail about everything that is wrong with such an idea. I will say, however, rails and quails and pheasants are none of the reasons we don't hunt doves in NY... Hopefully by now, instead of fishing for Red Herring, most people are starting to understand the real reason and will begin to focus on contacting state lawmakers and helping us organize other hunters.

Who would be willing to bring their lap top to Cablea's, Gander Mountain, and other places on National Hunting and Fishing Day to sign people up? I bet we could get 10,000 in just that one day if we had a person at a few of these NHFD events.

Please sign and get the word out. This is a long-term effort to gather 10,000 signatures. http://nydovehunting.weebly.com/petition.html

http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=33922725 http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/ted-nugent-s-new-brunswick-outfitters-face-illegal-hunting-charges-1.2994860

1) If you click on the link you provided this is what loads: Something Went Wrong Sorry, there was a problem with this link: http://www.poll-maker.com/poll268663x40C5ec73-10 You can now continue to this website, or go back to the page you were on before. Remember, only follow links from sources you trust. This part: Remember, only follow links from sources you trust, is going to scare people. The reason the link is directed to that intermediate page is becuase you copied off of face book. That is not restricted to face book, if you copy a link off of this site for example , it does that sometimes. The solution is simple, don't copy the link from a site you posted it on, instead, open the page and then copy the link. No doubt if you fix that, more people will take your survey. 2) Expanding on our discussion about Senator Lavalle on the other post, which is already too long; Lavalle is 75 years old. Thus, I wouldn't be overly concerned about him. He did succeed in passing the Pine Barrens Protection Act of 1993, so he is not all bad. Bills he is currently sponsoring do not include any mute swan legislation, but a deer management bill he sponsored is pending, S - 4151-2015. Lavalle's top campaign contributer is the NY State Teachers Union. He is on the Senate Environmental Conservation Committeee in 2015. He is a republican representing senate district 1. He won the last election with 66.4% of the votes cast. Like I said, however, he is 75 years old... The information I stated was derived from http://www.nysenate.gov/senator/kenneth-p-lavalle/legislation and http://ballotpedia.org/Kenneth_LaValle As I responded to you elsewhere, the finalization of the DEC mute swan plan is currently hinging on the outcome of the pending public review, it is not the legislative nor the court arena at this time. As I also indicated, I am skeptical that any additional legislation will be introduced to block the DEC, and I believe even if it is, it won't see the light of day. I am emphasizing this not to be combatant and argue with you. I am stressing it because the hunting community tends to allow certain politicians to become (*) Red Herrings of sort. We have a culture of bashing politicians, however, what we need to develop is a culture of participating in public review and other policy processes, as well as understanding various issues as they are. The current action regarding the mute swan plan epitomizes this and is a prime example. We still have people refusing to engage in public comment. And no offense, focusing on a 75 year old state senator. (*) Definition of Red herring From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia A red herring is something that misleads or distracts from a relevant or important issue.[1] It may be either a logical fallacy or a literary device that leads readers or characters towards a false conclusion. A red herring might be intentionally used, such as in mystery fiction or as part of a rhetorical strategy (e.g. in politics), or it could be inadvertently used during argumentation. The origin of the expression is not known. Conventional wisdom has long supposed it to be the use of a kipper (a strong-smelling smoked fish) to train hounds to follow a scent,( and train them to stay on the correct trail, not switch or trail non target game) or to divert them from the correct route when hunting; however, modern linguistic research suggests that the term was probably invented in 1807 by English polemicist William Cobbett, referring to one occasion on which he had supposedly used a kipper to divert hounds from chasing a hare, and was never an actual practice of hunters. The phrase was later borrowed to provide a formal name for the logical fallacy and literary device

The DEC has already conceded to giving preference to non-lethal strategies over more efficient means . However, the revised plan, does retain some use of lethal strategies . (As you pointed out, that is not good enough for Lavalle, but lets forget about that for the moment). One of the lethal strategies the DEC seeks to retain is hunting. The fact that hunting would be efficient does not in any way invalidate what I said - which is: that in order for (hunting) to be an implemented strategy , hunters must voice they want it in public comment. And they need to do so by April 24. If hunters do not voice support during public comment, the final plan will not include hunting, it is as simple as that... Not true at all. Our petition educated thousands of people from hunters to politicians to conservationists to the general public. It also had a direct influence on the Governor. As a matter of fact, if you read the DEC's summary, you will notice they cite the videos we sent them and the governor. Here is a link to that summary: http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/wildlife_pdf/pubcomsmuteswan2015.pdf I am not doing another mute swan petition. I submitted my public comment and that is it for me with this issue.

I revised post number 8, because I see I did not read what I was responding to carefully. You are correct, he does not see it as a done deal. However, my point is still valid. Please reread post number 8.

That statement sounds like he is not satisfied with the revised plan which will use (mostly) non lethal strategies.It sounds like he wants it so that only when the birds are posing a danger to people should lethal means be used. However, I don't know what his exact intentions are if the final plan is not revised even further. However, I don't think he will get very far if the DEC refuses to compromise any further. Let me explain more clearly why I think further political intervention is unlikely at this point: 1. The DEC pretty much accommodated the public outcry in their new plan. Legislation is not necessary. 2. They don't want to flop another bill, Many who voted for it, wont vote for it next time around. And, the Governor will veto it again even if it did pass again. At this stage of the game, the adoption of the plan is hinging on public comment, so those with vested interest in this should do so within the next few days. If legislation and/or a court injunction is introduced after the plan is adopted, the hunting community would again have to come together to defeat the legislation or influence the court if an injunction is filed. With that said, I don't discourage your preemptive effort regarding legislation, but not enough of the hunting community has engaged in this second round of public comment. Hunters more readily absorb politician bashing than other things and I am afraid that they will become distracted from participating in public comment if they become fixated on LaValle, for example. (I am not accusing you, but for example sake, knowing what I know about hunters, if I was an anti, I would use political bashing as bait to distract them)...

"If left alone by the politicians, the DEC is likely going to institute some sort of open season on mute swans" And, I disagree very much with what you said above in italics. This is our problem, everybody thinks that way and this thinking is wrong. The DEC will NOT go ahead and set a hunting season without a strong show of support from the hunting community in the public comment process. (which is happening right now) In fact, left alone, the DEC will listen to the public comment they are receiving. If the only people participating in the public review period are animal rights proponents, the direction of the policy will reflect that. Politicians have very little say-so at this time and are unlikely to intervene again at this point.

I think I have a pretty good grip on the pending policy and also what you are trying to do. Presently, there is an open public review on the revised mute swan plan. As far as I know, none of the strategies in the revised plan require legislative approval, nor is there any currently pending legislation or litigation to block the DEC. One of the elements the DEC is currently soliciting comments about is the opinion among the waterfowl hunting community as to whether or not hunting mute swans would harm the public image of waterfowl hunting. That element is pretty straight forward, and asks no more than: Do you think hunting mute swans will harm the public image of waterfowl hunting or do you think it will not harm the public image of waterfowl hunting? I indicated in my public comment, regarding that particular element, that I do NOT believe the hunting of mute swans would harm the public image of waterfowl hunting. I justified my opinion in that hunter behavior is always a factor in public acceptance of hunting and its image, and the issue should be addressed no differently in mute swan hunting than how it addressed in any other types of hunting. Anyone can feel free to resonate that talking point into their public comment and I encourage it.

Kudos for your effort, but what you are trying to accomplish requires a petition, not a survey. I have already sent my comments to the DEC on this issue, so I am not sure if signing a petition would be appropriate, but I am sure many others will sign on. If you get 1,000 who oppose a mute swan hunting season, that does not mean you are surveying hunters, how do you know they are not anti hunters? Suppose, for example, you did get 1,000 opposed and 500 supporters, and you do not submit the results to policy makers, because they are not favorable, all that does is NOT give the supporters a voice. By offering a simple yes or no; you are allowing the opposition to very easily and conveniently speak for those in support. Vote counting and surveys are NOT the same. I don't want to get into it in detail, and I am not an expert on the subject, but you need a petition, not a survey.

http://www.usnews.com/news/offbeat/articles/2015/03/16/woman-charged-with-killing-hunters-falcon-to-save-duck

This is interesting. They did a good job of getting OUR message out. That is the only factual info they ever published since they started in 1976.... (However, they were compelled to say I call myself the "elite hunter" on here... I guess its never let the truth get in the way of a good story as usual with them with that comment.)

Only if you can arrange for me to give a presentation about waterfowl hunting to his class,,, Looks like its needed...

I actually am glad this post got little attention. I looked at the budget proposals closer, and I don't think this is very exciting. I might write my state representatives in support of off loading the e-licensing expenses. I agree that this state mandate should not be funded by sporting license revenue in the amount of $ 1.2 million dollars a year. I am not apprised about the fish hatcheries, so I cannot comment on that aspect. The access projects are not specified as to where and why, and usually these projects benefit non-hunters rather than hunters. I personally would not support this without more information, and I doubt any info would persuade me because generally these projects rarely offer hunters anything and often negatively impact hunting. . As far as the Habitat and Access Account, all this does is create an additional account, outside the Conservation Fund and the explanation for the purpose of doing this does not make sense to me. The account will purportedly have the same protection from sweeping and diversion in the Capital Projects Fund as it does in the Conservation Fund; however, that is academic, because there is no satisfactory explanation given for this change.