mike rossi

Yet they find time to go from soccer to football to basketball to wrestling to baseball..... From grade school until high school graduation.... BTW: many 50 year olds who hunted in high school still hunt. How many who played football still do?

What predator has the biggest impact, coyotes , eh? No, its a non native invasive...

Never imagined as a kid that I would be on a computer talking about the percieved public safety issues involved in hunting chucks, squirrells, and cottontails - with an airgun no less. Its pretty hard to believe as an adult too. This doesn't represent hoplophobia?

Never mind, I see it is answered!

That works good. Many of us tried to cook it like chicken or turkey - and learned that wont work.

Some people will eat a piece of liver like a good steak and other people hate it. Most of us fall in the middle and like a couple thin slices on bread or with onions and other veggies... Waterfowl as well as woodcock, have a tinge of liver flavor. The extent of the liver-like taste varies bird to bird and place to place, but how it is cooked has a big influence on the taste. There are many different ways of cooking it and some recipes makes it tastes milder than others. Making jerky or sausage out of ducks and geese is very common, and to most of us, jerky and sausage all tastes the same regardless of the protein source...

Do you mean where to go or where these animals are found? The DEC office in Stoney Brook has many pamplets about public hunting areas on LI. For the second question, a good bet is to hunt along field edges and hegedrows for all three animals, but well inside woods you are less likely to see chucks and cottontails but off course you will see squirrels. Good luck!

If anyone wants to know, a book published in 1960 or 1970 era, called Mankind, by Cleveland Amory, made the argument about hunters selecting the fittest animals. That idea may have been around even earlier than that, but that is the earliest I am aware of. Amory latter founded the Fund for Animals.

September 1 marks the single busiest day of the year for the nation’s wingshooters. More Americans swing a gun on that day—the dove season opener—than any other, including 250,000 in Texas alone. Now even more of us can take to the field, thanks to new dove seasons in states like Iowa, Wisconsin, and Ohio.

I dont know but with a PA license, you can take doves at noon on the PA side.... If you call the DEC or PGC also ask them how you handle the HIP reporting as well, and please let us know! Also, what about Jersey, at some section over there you are dealing with 3 states?

Thats interesting and it debunks the opponents stance that game management sometimes neglects species diversity...

Predator control, at least focused predator control, sometimes increases the survival of prey animals. But some of the non hunting public, some biologists, and, off course, anti hunters do not believe it is ethical to control predators when the goal is to increase game populations for hunting. The debate is fueled by the contridiction created by the promotion of hunting's importance in population control of game animals. Elmo is simply asking: How do you all reconcile that?

It should also be pointed out that even if hunters are not doing the actual predator control, we are funding it, including projects for non game, threatened, and endangered species.

Predator control by trapping done by wildlife staff in nesting hot spots increases nest success very much, it is a valuable tool. I know thats different than the predator control most people think of, thats why I am pointing it out.

The casual hunters contribute to the conservation fund and wildlife restoration fund, yet only hunt a few hours a season, so I wouldnt say its a bad thing. However just because we all do not have the same level of dedication does not mean casual hunters do not have the responsibility to maintain the same level of safety, ethics, compliance to the law, and public image of hunting. Good thing most of them do and sometimes its the more active hunters that stir things up...

Are we talking about why we hunt or are we talking about the logic contridictions Elmo pointed out? Hunters often are programed to respond to the question: "why do you hunt"? with a defensive answer. Here is my answer to the question "Why do you hunt" I love it when a good plan comes together!!! The birds I hunt constantly change their patterns and behaviors and I must constantly adapt my strategy to meet those changes as well as the changes in weather and water conditions. Even when the plan fails it is exciting because the hurdles have been raised... The hunting season is the most intense with the need to constantly in-season scout and remain mobile. But I am emersed in it year-round. In the summer I am messing with my equipment, training my retriever, practicing with my duck calls and my shotgun. I enjoy the preparation almost as much as the hunt. When I am succesful there is a sense of satisfaction from putting my own food on the table. To me hunting is the ultimate combination of mental and physical stimulation.

Elmo, you also asked about what you could do to give back, I can give you some suggestions but it all hinges on the amount of time and travel you can commit to. There are volunteer opportunities in NY with the DEC, the fish and wildlife service, and with any number of conservation organizations, you can find them using a search engine. By the way most of the volunteers banding doves in Jersey have been vegan types. NY has been banding doves since 2008 and if/when the DEC or FWS use volunteers to band doves in NY lets hope some hunters are involved. I am surprised nobody suggested that you teach hunter - ed the most well known volunteer task. This is going to be unpopular, but thats too bad... The conservation organizations I am talking about are not a bunch of grumpy old men complaining about the democrats at 8 PM on a tuesday night and who are seeking volunteers to clean up their trash later in the week - that is helping out at the shooting range but its not conservation. I am talking about getting out in the field with a chapter of DU, RGS, or Delta Waterfowl or a similair organization to assist with conservation projects. If you dont have the time to volunteer and are thinking about donating cash, I would make sure the chapter you donate to will "spend your money wisely"...

If you research wanton waste laws you will know your legal obligations for eating or using harvested game. If someone wants to maintain a higher level of ethics than the law requires it is of course a personal choice. In the first paragraph of the position statement of The Wildlife Society on the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation it states: "Wildlife Should Only be Killed for a Legitimate Purpose". Since The Wildlife Society does not oppose hunting or trapping for fur they must consider it a "legitimate purpose". When we discuss predators, we tend to confuse two different issues. One issue is whether it is ethical to kill them and not eat them. You can eat predators, nobody is stopping you. The meat has relatively more toxins but that doesnt stop people from eating tuna. The other issue is if killing them to increase prey species is ethical, especially when we turn around and say we also hunt that same prey species for population control. Predator control is part of many restoration efforts for birds, turtles, and other small animals which have become endangered - its not all about deer and elk. Trophy hunting was one of the anti-hunting lobbies most common critisms, until trophy hunting fell out of favor with hunters. With renewed interest in trophy hunting and the use of AR and QDM the anti-hunting lobby will surely ressurect those arguments.The arguments claim culling the fittest animals is a result of trophy hunting and is not sound. That off course does not account for doe permits allocatted based on data from population inventories. If you dont want to trophy hunt, you can still hunt other legal deer or small game...

As explained on our F.B. page a nationwide dove management initiative implemented in 2008 has implemented a banding program in all states, including states that do not allow dove hunting. Wildlife agencies have utilized volunteers for banding and other projects for many years. While sportsmen will stock trout and sometimes band waterfowl, the volunteers that assist in non-game projects are generally non-hunters, some of them anti-hunters. To compound the matter more; colleges and universities have identified a trend such that very few wildlife students have ever hunted. The problem is so profound that the University of Davis California includes a waterfowl hunting trip in its curriculum. The state of New Jersey is basing its dove banding operation out of The Great Swamp National Wildlife Refuge. A logical location were federal wildlife workers are based. This NWR however is notorious for the decades old annual deer hunt protest. Dove hunting is one of the most vehemently opposed forms of hunting and Jersey does not allow dove hunting. Jersey is the most urbanized state and has a strong anti-hunting lobby. Federal and state wildlife agencies are also about getting the public close to nature, so to speak. In conjunction with banding, the refuge in Jersey invited the public to “release a dove”. We are not opposed to this ideologically; however the reality of the matter is that it will exacerbate anti -hunting sentiments and will overshadow and eventually undermine the longstanding efforts by sportsmen to assist wildlife agencies with both research and funding. As hunter’s numbers continue to decrease, (which they will in spite of stepped up recruitment efforts) wildlife agencies WILL seek stakeholders other than hunters to finance conservation – white-washing the number one defense of hunting and reducing the voice and influence of hunters. It is important that sportsmen and in particular organizations, especially those with much influence, keep track of both the volunteer opportunities and the interpretive learning programs regarding non-game species and be sure some of us are active in every project or interpretive venue. Article: http://www.fws.gov/f...&callingValue=5 Please Electronically Distribute and Cross Post this information.

The California Fish and Game Commission removed its president on Wednesday, months after he was criticized for killing a mountain lion in Idaho. Real estate developer Dan Richards was stripped of his leadership role with little discussion during a meeting in Ventura. Richards said his morning began ominously when he was listening to Nickelback during his workout and heard the song, "If Today Was Your Last Day." "I was fully aware today would be my last day as the president, but it's not my last day on God's green earth," Richards said after the unanimous vote to replace him with member Jim Kellogg. Richards, who was appointed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2008, has said he plans to remain on the five-member commission until his term expires in six months. Conservationists clamored for his ouster after photos surfaced earlier this year of him holding the slain mountain lion. Hunting mountain lions is banned in California, though it's legal in Idaho and other states. "Californians have twice voted in a resounding fashion to protect mountain lions in our state, and his flagrant flaunting of his disagreement with the electorate put him out of sync with California," said Jennifer Fearing, state director of the Humane Society of the United States. "We're glad to see the commission take action." Critics, including animal welfare groups, said the commission chief should uphold the values of the state he represents. Hunting groups defended Richards. Richards also came under fire for accepting the $7,000 hunting trip without paying any of the cost. He repaid the hunting lodge after an ethics complaint was filed. In the wake of the controversy, the commission changed rules that give the presidency to the most senior member of the commission and instead chose to have the president selected by majority vote. He told the San Jose Mercury News (http://bit.ly/MwkOvF) during a recent interview that he broke no wildlife laws. "There's no chance I did anything wrong," Richards said. "I did everything by the book." ___ Inf

It is a sport, just not a competitive sport... The amount of passion a person has for the sport of hunting defines whether it is a hobby or a lifestyle...

Elmo, At some point in history, hunters started defending hunting with ecological principles. At a latter point, after years of unsuccesful emotional arguments, the anti hunters started using ecological principals in their arguments. Both sides are biased, and both sides have incomplete knowledge. Fueled with passion and without a firm understanding, the debates go back and forth and the biology becomes convoluted. This is why you are struggling with contridictions.

On July 11, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) published its 2012-2013 Refuge-Specific Hunting and Sport Fishing Regulations. The proposed rule affects hunting and fishing regulations at 19 wildlife refuges throughout the country. At 16 refuges, FWS would increase hunting opportunities by opening new species and areas to hunters. Hunting would be allowed for the first time at the Detroit River International Wildlife Refuge, opened in 2001. Only two refuges would reduce open hunting activities: Hakalau Forest National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) in Hawaii and Santee NWR in South Carolina. A press release from FWS details other proposed changes. Hunting is allowed on refuges in accordance with The National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, provided it is compatible with refuge purpose and mission. The public comment period for this proposed rule will end on August 10. Comments can be submitted online, or by mail to: Public Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R9-NWRS-2012-0022; Division of Policy and Directives Management US Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS 2042-PDM Arlington, VA 22203 Sources: NWRS (July 11, 2012), Federal Register (July 11, 2012)