moog5050

Took the kids and wife out fishing yesterday with my Dad. Since I wanted more action for the kids (6 and 13yrs old), we targeted lakers. Caught more than I could count in 2 hours including 3 triples. As soon as I set a rigger, it would fire and then the next and next. Kids got tired of reeling them in. Biggest was 14lbs. Definitely not like fighting kings and I know its a "lesser fish", but seeing the kids battle them was about as much fun as I have had fishing. Just when we were ready to start looking for kings, my wife looked a bit green from the sun and rolling water (she tends to get sea sick) so we headed in. Don't discount fishing mid-day. All this action was between 1-3pm.

Grew quite a bit from late July. Nice.

You said its a SE facing slope I think - that should be great with a SW-W predominant wind. That top 1/3 line should have plenty of travel and bedding. Good luck.

Sounds like the Robin Hood approach.

Eating lunch and bored, so I will point this out: Ethics can be defined as moral principles that govern a person's or group's behavior. This means that ethical behavior can be consistent or inconsistent with rules, regulations, laws, etc. In this case, since the employer's purpose in offering the discount can be varied, my view is that the ethical thing to do is to abide by the rules pursuant to which the discount is offered, whatever those are. Belo pointed out an instance where rules don't require a certain behavior, but the ethical beliefs of many would. There are also times that laws specifically allow certain conduct that I may find immoral, hence unethical. Here, I believe that the right thing to do is to comply with the spirit and possibly rules by which the discount is offered and that is determined only by the employer. BTW - we don't all share the same moral principles, so your results may vary.

That this has gone on for 4 pages is funny. Whether its ethical or not is dictated by the terms of the company giving the discount. If the store says "buy as many as you want and do what you want with them", then no ethical concerns in reselling. If the store says "discounted items can only be purchased for personal use", then the answer is obvious. IMO

I agree that is a logical solution and would have been this time around. We have discussed ad nauseam why it makes no sense to use a smaller group hunting with less productive weapons to reduce population. Trust me, your idea won't happen because that would be a bad political move. Much easier to upset the smaller group of BHs than the much larger group of gun hunters. Politics 101 - if you need to upset a group, make it a small group or less vocal group. In fact, by opening an early gun season, the cheers of the gun only hunters will drown out any outcry by the BHs. I bet that this was all considered well in advance of the strategy employed. Plus, since most BHs are also gun hunters, the simple response is stop complaining, grab your gun and go hunt.

Frankly, as Phade was suggesting earlier, DEC has created a system to its benefit that puts the BHs in a catch 22. Either will kill and report more doe in the first two weeks allowing DEC to say "see our plan is working" and continuing it. Or, we don't kill and report more doe in the first 2 weeks allowing DEC to say "see BHs can't get it done" and we now need to go to more extreme measure by allowing guns or MLs in early season. No way for BHs to win under these circumstances. DEC has put themselves in a great position to do what they want in these "overpopulated" areas for the foreseeable future without risk of clear objective criticism. Couple that with undefined goals and DEC can justify whatever they choose with regard to altering bow seasons. Great political maneuvering but bad management if they want true results on reducing doe populations now.

I actually forgot my true worst mishap with a gun. My truck was at the dealer getting warranty work and they gave me a loaner. Decided to head to the range to shoot my new to me CZ premium 30-06. Put the cased gun on top of the loaner since I had to open the trunk to load other equipment. Loaded equipment and off to the range. You guessed it, get to the range and where is my gun? Holy smokes, I forgot it on the roof of the car. Several trips back and forth looking for the case on the side of the road and nothing. Not knowing what to do, I call the police and explain what happened. 2 days later, cops call to say that someone found my gun and had put it on the lost and found on craigslist. They return it with no damage. I call the young man who turned it in and he refused to accept a reward, explaining that he saw it lying in the side of the road in front of my street and grabbed it before another truck that had stopped. Nice to know we have some honest people around. I really wanted to do something for him, but he just wouldn't have it and complimented the gun.

You can still catch in the Caribbean. I am sure Kelly won't mind you spending more time with your cameras.

You don't eat the brain? What a waste.

I once shot Phade in the foot with a .22 after he told me that he wanted to set more stands and cameras. That said, I am not sure intentional conduct constitutes a mishap. Nothing really with a gun, but I did have a bow hanger twist and drop my new compound 15 feet. Landed in the thick stuff and no damage was done. Bow hanger was removed from that tree. I was hunting in sweatpants that day, so at least the mishap was consistent with my hunting attire.

Grow I think Orion is opposed to the new rule too, as an FYI and before you are too harsh.

I can confirm the latter. lol I also had the pleasure of hunting with both on the same day last year (and both killed bucks that day), but that doesn't really answer the question.

That would stink too GF. I prefer the choice, but if populations declined such that we wanted more deer, not less, I could live with it. That's not the situation in these WMUs. Although it may be the case in the future if DEC's "plan" is successful to the extreme. Never mind balance. Kill all the doe, then no doe for years while the population regenerates, then kill all the doe again. Vicious cycle and poor management to say the least.

Phade's point, which is correct, is that DEC hasn't stated what will appease it.

Most companies will have specific guidelines on how an employee can use these discounts. While I understand Phade's point, these companies have already factored in goodwill in their policies. I would suspect nearly all will frown on an employee buying at a discount and reselling cheaper than company prices. That isn't goodwill for the company. If anything, it suggests to the public that the company is selling at prices that are too high to begin with.

I agree. At least if DEC said, we want 50,000 doe taken in archery, the BHs could have a number to shoot for and hopefully avoid the inevitable "well we need to open part of the season to firearms." Not that the BHs should shoulder this burden, but at least the DEC plan would be clear. As it is, DEC leaves the issue open so that it can do what it wants regardless of the increase in doe kills in archery.

I understand. I hunt in the affected areas and pass many, many doe every year. I also average killing 4 doe a season, probably 2 (3 last year) in archery. Again, I don't see myself taking more doe overall simply because its doe only first two weeks of archery, but I do suspect that is the DEC's thinking. If DEC really wants more doe taken in this period, then open DMPs to as many as a hunter wants with proof that the first two are filled. Even in these WMUs, each area is different, but some do have very high doe populations. We have one property where we regularly shoot 10 plus doe a season and it is still heavily populated the next season. Other properties in the same WMU, 10 doe taken would decimate the local population.

I have to assume that DEC thinks that the doe take will stay the same in gun even if BHs are pushed to take more doe in early season. I don't agree with the premise, but doe take should increase if that were true.

How much of this perceived lack of doe killing by BHs is really more of a failure to report kills? Is that some how taken into account by DEC? Regardless, there just aren't enough BHs in the woods, whether waiting for a buck or not, to kill huge numbers of doe. EAB through gun season will result in a much greater doe slaughter. Not sure if this isn't implemented due to $$$$$ for DEC. ARs in this area would also have a very limited effect since most 1.5 bucks are 6s or 8s anyways.

Livin the life of Riley. Good for you Biz.

Honestly, I never found it to be very different shooting seated or standing other than trying to shoot to my right seated. That I cannot do.

I will sit if I can, but shoot both ways.

Tip - the more you keep your bow and body in correct alignment, the easier the bow is to hold at full draw using back tension. Not always the easiest thing to do in hunting situations. I agree with others, draw when you can do so without being noticed.