d-bone20917

Ha! So true. I went to college in Oklahoma and when you tell people you are from NY they just think the whole state is NYC. The fact that I lived 6 hours away and had never been there really surprised them.

It always has pissed me off that my NYS pistol permit isn't valid in in NYC. Last I checked NYC was part of NYS.

I was just kidding about my age Biz. I turned 18 about 22 years ago. I'm sticking it out in NY for now with my job and family. But I hear the same thing about the hunting.

Maybe when I turn 18 I will. It's actually a very nice state.

Exactly. It's OUR land, not his. So what right does he have to pretend he owns it? He shouldn't rely on the use or our land to subsidize his business. When I hunt, fish, camp, etc. on public land I follow all the rules in place and I'll pay a fee if needed. So we should just throw all that out the window and say public land should be a free for all in the name of freedom? Should we just kill all the animals we want anytime we want? To hell with any government agency trying to manage a public resource... this is land of the free and home of the brave. On the flip side, I think the Feds have handled this very poorly.

I would think most would choose ND over NYC or Westchester. I know I would.

He's a welfare rancher who's sucking off the government teet. He should boot strap it and quit relying on government handouts. Why should our tax money support these type of free loaders? It's this sort of entitlement mentality that is ruining our country.

Feel free to fact that.

I thought he was sending it home to Kenya.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/conspiracy/nevada.asp

Everyone has their own perspective on this issue. I'm a big supporter of public land and the public's right to use that land. I also believe everyone should follow the rules to protect that land.

So not allowing individuals to obstruct law enforcement activities is national socialism? What happens when these innocent protesters get caught in the cross fire? I don't disagree with you though. If people are ready to die to support this guys illegal activities then I say have at it, but is that really in the best interest of public safety? Are they free to protest anywhere they want when law enforcement isn't seizing cattle?

They could have peacefully protested where ever they wanted to. When you threaten to engage federal law enforcement officers in a fire fight then they limit where you can protest. It's no longer considered peaceful at that point.

I wasn't referring just to this area. They still issue a lot of grazing permits and they need to enforce the law. There must be a reason the Nevada Cattleman's Association backed the BLM. I guess we will just have to see where it goes.

Yeah, there has been a lot of opinion pieces on both sides, but there are some facts out there if you look for them. They gave this guy numerous chances to make it right and he didn't. If they never take action why would any of the other cattle farmers getting permits and actually paying them comply? Try not paying your taxes and see how long it takes the IRS to take action.

Having your cattle graze on federal land is not a right. This guy had his cattle grazing illegally for 20 years. It seems the BLM has been more than patient.

I can't agree with the last part. I'll take free range fair chase venison anyday over beef or pork.

It's only a rich man's sport if you want to pay big bucks to lease land or hire a guide to put a trophy on your wall. There is a ton of public land throughout the US where anyone can go hunt and kill a decent animal for hardly any money (basically just the tag cost). It doesn't have to be a rich mans sport depending on how you define a trophy.

Good point.

I posted a similar response on another thread, but the introduction of wolves would be a huge mistake for the areas that currently have low densities. Look at what they've done to the elk herds in Montana. They are killing machines, much more so than coyotes. Some states allow unlimited doe take, why not try that and let people eat them vs other predators? This would primarily be for the southern zone, it isn't really an issue up north where I hunt. I can't even get a doe permit in 6N.

Introducing wolves would be a huge mistake. First off, they would most likely be in the Adirondacks were deer numbers are already low. Most of these areas don't give out doe permits for that reason. There are plenty of tools available to the DEC to control numbers that don't involve increased predator numbers. Other states have been successful at this. How about unlimited doe take in areas that need reductions? Maybe an earn a buck program? Maybe a couple more months of bow season after regular season as doe only?

I try like hell. I didn't fill my bow tag this year but I did take a buck and doe during rifle season. I would have gladly taken another doe tag or two, but I don't live in an area where they are trying to drastically reduce numbers either. Personally I don't think legalizing crossbows was a deer management decision. I think issuing additional tags to those that fill theirs and would like more would also be an option if the goal is to reduce population size.

If the issue is simply to reduce deer numbers than why not just give out more tags to the people that are already hunting? I'd gladly take a couple more to get the numbers down.

Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, or Colorado.

Maybe so. I see a lot of guys that previously didn't hunt archery heading out like its a gun and taking shots they shouldn't take. When you are holding it like a gun and looking through a scope all of sudden that deer 80 yards away looks shootable. There are still lots of deer not recovered during rifle season because bad shots are taken.