mike rossi

You are exactly correct, however do you know who provided the recipe for the sour cream? Its your own fault if you choose off the wrong menu. NY sportsmen eat too much junk food. Wise up everybody.

Exactly, his political career is over. Sportsmen are very distracted right now and during that distraction all these crazy regs and misuse of money is happening in real time as it historically has. Im not saying it was engineered, but they are going with the flow of opportunity...

You need a little more back-round info on this: The Finch land in ADK was paid for by a private non profit with the intent of transfering it to the DEC. The DEC renegged on the deal and did not aquire it. It was to be paid for out of the EP Fund and leveraged with federal dollars. The EPF was oriinally created 20 years ago for ONE purpose - to buy land. If you watched the dam video I asked you all to watch you would see that fund is going all over the place, including requests from black nieghborhoods in NYC to help them pump out their basements. But NOT to aquire the finch property- which would be very much in line with the original intent of the environmental protection fund - unlike many other outrageous projects it will be divided up for. FYI: The Conservation Fund and the EP Fund ARE NOT THE SAME and hunting licenses dont pay into the EP Fund. You also are mistaken about the value of this land. The investment return on conservation land is reported to be five to one, making it the best return a state could make for its money. So all the BS coming from the council and freinds about it taking away the tax base, bla, bla, bla, is just more of their bull they are brainwashing hunters with. Heck - some states have an open space TAX everybody pays! It is also untrue that the current landowner will not allow hunting, deer hunting at least, nor is it true that if it eventually does become added to the park will hunting not be allowed. See, its not about hunting... The council et al also make misleading statement which you obviosly are repeating regarding that the dec should buy smaller tracs closer to the population centers, bla, bla, bla. Well guess what - there is plenty of money in the conservation fund to do that and federal matching grants to leverage the CF. During the same testimony, the same groups that make this posposterous claim want to lower the price of hunting licenses because the CF is large. This is outrageous! I suggest the council, which considers itself a conservation organization, to do as the other non profit did, and provide the state with matching dollars so they can get that boat ramp on the hudson river and all these small wmas...

Doc, I pleaded with you a week ago to listen to that budget video. I touched on this in my drivel in that post. There is a difference between spoon feeding and force feeding. Its up to these younger guys to take the torch...

That coyote stip doesnt make any sense to me either. Probably came from the wind bags from the council et al and the politicians handed out candy to pacify the children (ie. make the reps from the council et al feel empowered). They wont take the time to listen to real things, but they find time for these sort of things. How many times does this exact thing have to happen over & over and be pointed out over & over before sportsmen wise up? Its mostly up to you guys in your twenties & thirties to start paying attention and use critical thinking rather than believe whatever is thrown at you... Good point about the gas prices. People will be screaming when the fracking of natural methane gas doesnt bring down the price of gasoline and they learn that as Canada residents did, it gets exported to china and India and your heat bill actually goes up with the over seas demand. I wouldnt worry about Cuomo getting elected again, for any office, anywhere. He made too many enemies and did too many stupid things.

They are well beyond the door, they are already influencing conservation policy in a big way.

I am willing to bet that you have no problem with stocking trout and warm water fish, even though unlike pheasant, both the existing available habitat and the potentially restorable habitat is much greater. End note: The potential for sustainable wild pheasant populations in NY is limitied. The potential for wild-hatched fisheries is much greater, yet fish stocking is not attacked or questioned. This premise is clearly a political agenda from some folks and faulty logic from other folks. Funding? Did you follow the other post about the budget? The state conservation fund is swollen. The state can apply for federal funds that will match the state's investment three dollars to every state dollar. Yet the state is not taking full advantage of this. The state also has a voluntary habitat stamp from which funds can be drawn to match federal dollars. Pheasant Forever chapters and national headquarters are still an additional source of funds to match federal funds. The Farm Bill has a number of conservation provisions which give landowners financial incentive to restore, improve, maintain, or preserve habitat. Those programs can be taken advatage of by landowners with or without public hunting cooperative leases, as a matter of fact landowners are given additional financial incentive because the hunting can be free or by fee. Fact is there is a lot of programs out there and a lot of money to pay for them. End note: There is ample money and a variety of programs available for habitat. As far as hiring more gorillas to enforce the law, how is that relevant to pheasant? I suppose you are going to tell me the decline of north american grassland wildlife is due to poaching? It may be partially contributed to non hunters harrassing wildlife in the off season - but that just doesnt give the leos an andreniline rush, so they niether enforce nor educate. End note: Poaching is a miniscule part of the problem. The annual salary of one ECO is around 40,000. That buys or leases a lot of land. $40,000 worth of land will produce a heck of alot more wildlife than a single ECO will save during his/her thirty year career. The same organization (HSUS) who filed the pheasant program law suit against the dec have also lobbied against every effort to control this continents number one introduced predator - the house cat, as well as against proposed legislation to ban the maintenance of feral cat colonies. They done the same with the second (IMO) most deleterious introduced species, the mute swan. End Note:The HSUS is influencing the policy of conservation and continues to negatively impact conservation funding. Nowhere in the lawsuit nor in your post do I see any indice of how much pheasant hunting and the related stocking program put into the conservation fund and into general economic activity. End note: The economic position of the lawsuit and your post has not been derived from any sort of objective economic analyis.

Loss of Conservation Funding Up to 98% of money raised by the duck stamps is used to purchase or lease habitat within the National Wildlife Refuge system.” Estimate of the impact the amount of duck stamps which would have been sold had hunters remained connected to waterfowl on the revenue loss and to estimate how much habitat could have been made available to conservationists. “If hunter levels had kept consistent with historical trends then 600,000 more duck stamps would have been expected to have been sold between 1995 and 2008 than actually occurred,”. “That equates to an annual loss of $9,000,000, or $126 million across the whole period. For conservation the results are dramatic as this money could have resulted in 42,495 ha of wetlands.” Looking to the future, the team predict that hunter numbers will continue to decline due to various social, cultural and economic factors. By using three different scenarios to explore the economic impact, the team estimate that up to $14.3 million could be lost annually.

When HSUS Comes a-Knockin’ If you’re a dog breeder, we're sure you’ve already heard of the Humane Society of the United States's "animal rescue team." The idea is that in cases where animal abuse is reported, HSUS can send its people to raid private property and "liberate" abused animals. (And, of course, shoot video for fundraising purposes.) Until his recent departure from HSUS, one such team was led by Scotlund Haisley, who was the group's Senior Director of Emergency Services. (That's him in the Facebook picture at left, kicking in a door with his HSUS garb on. And that was him, featured on HSUS's Twitter feed, until last week when HSUS started circling its wagons and his photo disappeared.) If anyone knows what became of Mr. Haisley since he was "released" from HSUS, we'd sure like to know. Mainly because he left HSUS in a cloud of controversy stemming from a raid in South Dakota last September. Originally, HSUS teamed up with a local group called Second Chance Rescue to storm the property of a hunting dog breeder on September 2. HSUS seized 172 dogs, issued a press release, and touted the operation as a success. The breeder was charged with animal cruelty. But Magistrate Court Judge Tami Bern ruled in January that the September search warrant HSUS helped execute was illegal. Shortly thereafter, the HSUS backpedaling began. In September, HSUS was bragging that the raid was their fourth one that week, and put out a self-congratulatory press release. But by February, HSUS was acting as if it had nothing to do with it, telling South Dakota's KELO-TV that HSUS “did not have any involvement in the case,” or even in making sure what it was doing was legal. That seems to contradict testimony from the animal control officer who got the warrant. In January the officer “admitted that the Humane Society of the United States was sitting at the Turner County Fairgrounds ready to take [the breeder's] dogs before she even had a warrant for the raid.” Sounds pretty gung-ho to us. Here’s how KELO-TV recounts HSUS’s denial: The Humane Society of the United States was also involved in seizing the dogs from Christensen's property. The HSUS was actually sitting at the Turner County Fairgrounds the day Rosey Quinn of Second Chance Rescue Center went to ask a judge to issue the warrant to raid Dan Christensen's property. … HSUS told KELOLAND News it was simply asked by Second Chance to help with the removal of Christensen's 172 dogs and did not have any involvement in the case, obtaining the warrant or making sure what they were doing that day was legal. But back in September, they said they were playing a role in the case. "We're collecting evidence; we're safely and humanely removing them. Some animals may be fractious. We're providing the animals with all the necessary medical care and the sheltering personnel. Sheltering personnel for 172 dogs is dozens and dozens of people scheduled on a regular daily basis," Scotlund Haisley of the HSUS said on September 3, 2009. So HSUS showed up to South Dakota and, according to news reports, waited around while an animal control officer went to get a search warrant. But they didn’t know anything? Color us skeptical. Following the raid, Haisley was HSUS's go-to guy for hyped-up, over-the-top accusations: "[We] found 172 dogs found in absolutely horrible conditions, deplorable, dilapidated buildings living in their own feces and urine, a lot of sharp objects around. On a scale of one to ten, ten being the worst conditions I've seen, this is definitely a nine." If Haisley was so concerned with the dogs, why didn’t he and HSUS care for them? Less than one week after the raid, KELO-TV reported that HSUS had already packed its bags and left, leaving the local Second Chance Rescue folks to find volunteers to help care for the scores of dogs. (And some of the people fostering those animals are growing impatient.) Second Chance Rescue's director admits that 28 dogs died in the group’s care following their seizure. And while none of the dogs were sick when they were seized, many became ill after HSUS left town: A letter from Veterinarian Laura Byl says none of the dogs had the disease, but another document shows at least ten of the dogs contracted the virus while they were in the care of Second Chance Rescue and some got so sick, they died. So much for Haisley’s September 3 boast that “[w]e're providing the animals with all the necessary medical care and the sheltering personnel.” We think we can judge a lot about HSUS’s animal rescue team from Scotlund Haisley’s Facebook picture. Is this a mission of mercy, or a bunch of adrenaline junkies playing SWAT? We're not joking: Some HSUS animal rescue team members are even given badges. How is this not a case of impersonating a police officer? (More on that another time.) It’s hard to believe HSUS gets away with this kind of reckless conduct, but I'm hearing from many, many people who have found themselves on the wrong side of one of these raids. It seems to me that the group is in it for the PR that the raids inevitably generate. They swoop in, raid someone's home, and fly off as fast as they came—often leaving underfunded local rescue groups to clean up their mess. Maybe—just maybe—Haisley's departure signals a change of tactics. But this isn’t the only case. Stay tuned

November 16, 2009 NY Pheasant Stocking Humane Groups Oppose Proposed 10-Year Extension of Cruel, Wasteful Pheasant Program The Humane Society of the United States This week, The Humane Society of the United States, Humane Society of New York, New York League of Humane Voters and New York State Humane Association submitted comments to the New York Department of Environmental Conservation opposing the continuation of pheasant stocking. In the wake of Gov. David Paterson's proposal to close the Richard E. Reynolds Game Farm that produces 100,000 pheasants annually, the DEC is proposing a draft plan to extend its wasteful and inhumane pheasant stocking program for the next decade. The HSUS comments are available here. In past years, the DEC spent $750,000 annually to release pheasants on public land for shooters. These farm-reared birds have limited survival skills and represent a nonnative species. Studies consistently show that if shooters do not kill the animals immediately, the birds succumb to harsh weather, get eaten by predators or starve. "These birds are literally sitting ducks for waiting shooters," said The HSUS' New York state director Patrick Kwan. "The DEC should not be in the business of raising animals in incubators to be shot and calling it wildlife management. Traditional hunting demands that animals be given a reasonable chance to escape, not thrown from the back of a truck at an announced time and date." The draft Ten-Year Management Plan for Ring-Necked Pheasants in New York calls for the annual stocking of 30,000 adults and distribution of 60,000 chicks to clubs in a cooperative rearing program. One commendable aspect of the proposal calls for the ending of the Young Adult Pheasant Release program. This program included the annual release of 30,000 young birds during the summer. Overwhelmingly, these birds succumbed to predators or the elements and did not even survive to the fall shooting season. Background: Ring-necked pheasants are native to Asia and cannot find the habitat in New York to naturalize and reproduce; consequently, the DEC hand-rears birds for shooters. The farm raising process produces tamer birds unable to survive in the wild. To make sure that shooters, instead of coyotes, kill the exotic birds, the animals are stocked just prior to and throughout hunting season, creating an unethical hunting situation. Pheasant stocking panders to a shrinking constituency. According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, New York small game hunters declined by 36 percent from 1996 to 2006. According to informal DEC surveys, pheasant hunters number less than 50,000. Wildlife watchers, those who enjoy New York's wildlife by hiking or bird watching, numbered more than 3.5 million in 2006 and continue to increase. After handing out chicks for rearing and release onto public land, the state does not conduct follow-up inspections of facilities to ensure that animals are treated humanely or that environmental conditions do not lead to massive die-offs.

How Coyote Hunting with Dogs is Done Most people don't really know how coyote hunting with dogs is done. They assume that it is a quick and humane death for the coyote and lots of fun for the dogs. NOT SO. Watch this video: Download Wp9lR6A4_c0 In the summer, they are trained on penned fox and coyotes. Yes, pens where the fox and coyotes have no chance to escape. The pens are lined with electrified fence that will deliver a strong shock to any animal that touches it. There are tubes and large pipes that the foxes and coyotes can use to hide in, but these are often blocked before the dogs are let loose so that the coyotes and foxes can not run into them to escape the dogs. There are photos taken by the hunters of their dogs killing the helpless foxes and coyotes outside of the blocked tubes. The pens are used during the "off season", usually the hot summer months. Be sure to check out the website http://www.coyoterescue.org/ for more info on the use of live foxes and coyotes to train dogs. The hunters fasten GPS tracking devices to their dogs collars. The GPS tells the hunter where their dog is. It doesn't control where it goes or what it chases, or anything else the dog does. The dogs are taken to an area where they might cross a coyote track. These areas have often been baited with deer carcasses in prior weeks. This helps insure the dog will find a track. Once a track is found, the dogs are released to follow it. They go wherever the tracks go - across your property, across county and state property, and across posted land whether or not permission has been granted by the landowner. Often the dogs change course if they see another species, such as deer or fox and chase that too. You need to know that it is illegal for these hunters to allow their dogs to run on or across your land without your express written permission. If you see their trucks with the dog boxes in the back, chances are, they are trespassing. Get license plate numbers! You can call your State Troopers, Sheriffs, Conservation Law Officers and make a complaint. Chances are these trespassers will be gone before help arrives and they count on that, so get license plate numbers and give them to the law enforcement. Press charges too, or the guys will be back the following weekend doing it again. Make sure your property is well posted so the charges stick! What a lot of people don't know is how the coyote is actually killed. Teams of fresh dogs are used to run the coyote to exhaustionsometimes for as many as 8 hours. The guys use their GPS devices to watch the location of the dogs, then drive their trucks to the closest location and drop fresh dogs. If they see the coyote run across the road or across a field, they will try to cripple it with a shot to the hip. This is done so that the dogs can now catch the crippled coyote. The "Kill dogs" are released on the coyote and the helpless crippled coyote is torn apart as the hunters encourage their dogs to kill their cousin. The hunters use encouragement such as "Git that Yote, good boy!" as the dogs bite and attack the coyote. Often as many as 6 or more dogs are used to tear the living wounded coyote to bits. This violent, torturous death can take 20 minutes, sometimes more. When that coyote is dead or near death, the dogs are sent to go find another track. Here is a video to show you Download 1JfqB_s3pAo Don't fall for the "this is tradition" defense. I don't recall GPS tracking devices and automobiles being used by our fore fathers, do you? Check out the files on this site that are full of photos. Notice that in most of the photos you can see the shot placement in the hind legs, sometimes the shoulder area. The hunters are good shots and are very careful to only wound, not kill the coyote. They want their dogs "to get some chewing in" as they call it. Watching the scene is worse than watching a pitbull fight, which is of course, illegal. So why is killing coyotes with dogs legal in every state in the USA? Because not enough people know about it and how inhumane it is. These are the lowest of the low hunters. These hunters do not go for the quick humane kill like ethical hunters do. They take pleasure in torturing and maiming their prey. Their own dogs are often wounded in the process, but they don't care. Many of their dogs race across roads in front of cars during the chase- putting human lives and of course the dogs lives at risk. Do you own property in the country that you don't have constant watch over? There is a good chance that the coyote hunters are using your property for their sadistic bloodsport. Start watching, inform your neighbors and local law enforcement. Post your property well and have neighbors watch for the hunters trucks for you. Get those license plate numbers and press charges. These hunters have no respect for wildlife, no respect for posted property and certainly no respect for you. Download Yotehunt004-1

Here you go, PLEASE watch the whole thing, same but different: http://vimeo.com/44367635

I started to notice it during the mid 1980s about the time MTV was big.

Thats a big part of it, people from Avella's district which is Queens, only know habituated squirrels not rural squirrels. They dont know how hard it can be to actually bag a limit of them.

Somebody had indicated that link doesnt work. I also heard the Senator Avella, representing Queens, is opposed to a squirrel contest because he thinks it is wrong to teach kids 1) to use guns 2) to bag a limit 3) make a contest out of it. This reached me today, is this the same hunt?

We apparently are not on the same page, I guess I dont understand what you meant.

Virgil, Are you saying that a forum dicussion on this would increase anti-science attitudes? Everybody and their labrador retriever has already heard the anti-science rhetoric, so there is nothing to loose by presenting the other side of the coin...

Doc, wouldnt this make a good topic in itself?

I dont know what the scope of this hearing was supposed to be, but they made reference most often to the EPF, but the CF was specifically discussed as well. But I agree with you - a number of people testifying were all over the map and over the top and the entire hearing was convoluted. Much of the questions to the DEC and testimony was about fracking, which although very important, this topic frequently strayed from how it relates to budget many times during the hearing. But heck, one of the latter testifiers, Dave VanLuven, from the Environmental Advocates of NY summed it up the best. He testified that 20 years ago he was one of the key players in crafting the EPF. He said the original intent of it was LAND AQUISITION. What he alluded to is true, if you listen to the 7.5 hour hearing, the EPF now funds a wide range of things including helping people in NYC with basement flooding problems... What is ironic about what VanLuven said, is that the only thing definitive spoken at the hearing was that the controversial Finch Property aquisition will not be completed with or without EP Funds - go figure! By the way, my earlier comments that the finch property was paid for by the bottle bill is incorrect. The Nature Conservancy Purchased the property in trust for the state, however the state will not complete the transaction at least right now.

Especially when you are not only a senator, but on thee committee within the senate, that decides which DEC issues move forward to the rest of the senate and which issues are trash-canned ...

Good points Doc. DU has an advantage with conservation issues because most people other than big bussiness ceos and their investors are accepting of their cause. With controversial stuff like guns, traps, and hunting you need extra caution. We write in to influence the public at large, which the politicians notice, according to DU. You certainly wont influence the public at large with angry attacks, emotional drivel, or versus of doctrine. The number of people who read news letters is staggering. A factual letter can debunk fallacies and can influence public opinion. Regardless of where the majority public opinion rests, all but the most vulgar politicians are at least hesitant to support the side of controversial issues whose premises' have been debunked in local print. I will add to Doc's caution recommendation, with another caution: be sure that you present facts and information from reliable sources and do not trust doctrine or propaganda.

I agree that sportsmen too often attack studies with the same line of offense you describe. However, think about how a study comes to be: A scientist has an idea he wants to test or is funded to solve a problem or gather info. Now, with that in mind, think about what idea drove this study. Humm, imagine a scientist waking up one day and saying to himself, "gee I wonder how the incidence of home invasions stopped by firearms compares to accidental shootings in the home". How can anyone deny that this particular study is one of those kinds of studies that are engineered to reinforce a political agenda?

DU Article: Politicians follow letters to newspapers Washington, D.C., may seem far removed from where you live, but lawmakers keep their ear to the ground when it comes to their constituents’ opinions. One of the ways members of Congress and their staffs stay on top of issues and attitudes is by reading hometown newspapers in their state, which provides Ducks Unlimited supporters a great opportunity to write a letter to the editor of your local newspaper to encourage congressional action on a full five-year farm bill. Tips for your letter to the editor Newspapers have different length restrictions, but letters to the editor are usually kept around 200-250 words and are more likely to be printed if you describe how the farm bill conservation programs affect your community. Your newspaper’s opinion section will usually contain an email address to which you can submit your letters. Once you do so, it’s OK to call the paper and encourage them to print it. We’ve prepared three sample letters to the editor about the farm bill to help you get started. (NY Dove Hunting supports this but deleted the link to keep to our special interest, however you can view this on DU’s website) Good luck, and let us know if your letter is printed! Just email Heather Stegner, DU’s government affairs communications manager, at [email protected]. 

Did Obama actually make a better choice this time? That is an implied yes, but time will tell… The brand new February 2013 Obama appointee to head the EPA seems like a nice lady who resonates with sportsmen and environmentalists: The EPA director who just stepped down in February 2013. She might also be a nice person as well, and we are not judging her personal life, we just feel her personal life, as well as the same lifestyle apparently entrenched or encouraged in the workplace culture of the EPA, is irrelevant to environmental protection and that they have too much work to do with too little money to be discussing, promoting, or publicizing their sexuality when on the clock and creating public messages about it such as this you tube video.