steve863

I sure would want to look beyond Trump and Harris because they are both horrible but one of them will end up being the next president of the United States. And a president certainly has a good amount of influence on which direction a nation will go. Trump showed nothing last night in the debate to sway any of the very few who haven't made up their mind yet. Harris said nothing of any relevance but at least she didn't come across as a ranting loon like Trump did. It's quite pathetic that we have 300 million people in this country and these two are all we are left to vote for. I truly believe that if the republicans nominated most any other sane candidate they would have mopped the floor with Harris in the debate AND the coming election. But NO, Trump was what they wanted and now it's becoming a struggle and folks are worried about what a shithole this country will end up being.

Looks like a plastic or rubber part of something to me also. Like an attachment to some sort of machinery. Way too perfect in its shape to be bird feathers.

Roosevelt was a very intelligent man. Probably one of the smartest, well read presidents ever, so I don't think he'd very easily follow any ideology that he didn't think through for himself. On a scale of 1 to 10 for brains I'd put him up there very close to a 10. Biden, Kamala and even Trump I would not grade any higher than a 3. Most modern elected officials can be pulled by their nose hairs quite easily these days. As can much of today's society also.

Really? And how would you know that for certain?? He did move away from the Republican party even back then. I can only imagine what he'd think of it today.

Permethrin has been talked about pretty much everywhere (magazines, this forum, hunting/outdoor shows and videos, etc.) for a good while now as the best defense against ticks.

I use the Martins 10% and don't think the smell is any different than the Sawyers. For me it's way more economical even if it's costing more than it used to (what isn't more expensive?). I've had a 32oz bottle (I think I paid around $20 for it) for probably 3 years now and it's not even half empty yet. One 24oz bottle of the Sawyers at probably around $18 will pretty much handle one set of clothes and gear for one season and not much more.

Check out this video. You can save a LOT of money if you mix your own. I use this guys method and it works. Same % concentration as Sawyers. One bottle of the unmixed stuff goes a LONG way. The Sawyer ready to use stuff is not cheap.

Nope, you don't need to call the DEC to ask them to print it again. I bought mine online and they email you a pdf of your license and you can print it 1000 times if you want. Why in the world wouldn't the DEC think that this will just tempt people to do exactly what you were describing is beyond me. The only way these plain paper tags would work without tempting people to keep killing on the same tag is if they made people phone or text in their kill into the DEC right away. Right now you still have 7 days to report your kill. Plenty of time to bring your deer home, put it in the freezer and kill again on the same reprinted tags. Unreal how stupid the DEC is. As far as the backtags getting scrapped I could care less. Never bothered me to wear it. I simply hooked it on to my backpack which I always have with me.

The DEC put out a video about this. I still say that this will pretty much allow people to kill as many deer as they want. Most people have to drive to their hunting spots. Some like myself a good distance. You would take a big risk not filling out your tag to transport the deer back home with the old tags. You voided it once you filled it out. Who is to stop someone from filling out this printable paper tag and then just printing out another one (or already having a bunch printed) to use next time?? The only way these new paper tags would work effectively is if people had to call in or post in their kills via DEC website immediately after a kill. Giving people several days to call it in with these new tags will in reality give hunters NO bag limits. Yeah, some will claim that many killed over their bag limits even with the old tags, which is true. But why the hell make things even easier for these type of folks?? And don't tell me that this new system isn't going to be tempting for many others out there also. Huge blunder here by the DEC in my opinion.

Climbing up into trees can be dangerous no matter what type of stand you choose. Someone getting up there in age should wise up and hunt from the ground. That's my take on this subject. Hard enough for a young person to recover from a fall nevermind someone 60 plus.

I saw that Spomer video. Doesn't really surprise me. I surely wouldn't go that cheap on a scope but one surely doesn't need to spend $1000 + on one either. I honestly never had a scope fail no matter how cheap or expensive it was. Maybe if someone is putting several thousand rounds through a rifle a better scope would be beneficial since it should be built better but most hunters don't shoot anywhere near that much. A scope costing $200-$500 will last the hunter a lifetime.

Wounded or not I find it very bizarre that a truly wild wolf would be so calm to let a human put his arm around it in order to have a picture taken. Is that a beer can in that guys hand? Maybe he got the wolf good and drunk to calm him down?

Interesting take here. You are blaming other hunters when the problem may be that the landowner just doesn't want you to hunt there anymore. These days you pretty much have two choices when it comes to hunting. You either own or lease land or you hunt public land. Not many landowners will be letting you hunt for free anymore just because they've known you for years or because you have a nice disposition. These are just the facts of hunting life today. There are a fraction of hunters hunting these days compared to 30 or 40 years ago. Yes, some may be slobs but I think the percentage of slob hunters is way less these days compared to the old days when you had way more hunters out there and it was more likely that some would be slobs. So, unless you have some real evidence that slob hunters have changed this landowners mind about letting you hunt his land I don't think it's fair blaming other hunters for you not being able to hunt his land anymore. I would bet that most of us if not ALL of us here have lost hunting opportunities on land that we used to have access to. That's just the way it goes these days, unfortunately.

I never realized how fun fishing for catfish could be. I'm not much of a fisherman but I never fished for them until last year. The neighbor across the road from where I hunt has a nice sized pond and it's got a ton of catfish in it. He's kind enough to let us fish his pond. My son caught these in a couple hours of fishing back in July. We tried hotdogs as bait as some recommend but it seems like we caught more with plain old nightcrawlers that we bought at Walmart. Surprisingly they aren't bad to eat either.

Another vivid memory from yesteryear was seeing hunters transporting their deer outside their vehicles. Don't see that very often anymore. People went hunting with their everyday cars or stationwagons in those days. These days most have a truck or large SUV of some sort so most deer are getting put inside the vehicle. The only thing hauled on the outside these days might be the $10K 4 wheeler used to take the hunter the 300 yards or less to their treestands and then hopefully help haul the deer back out if they get one. Seems like all you needed in the old days to drag one out was a rope that only cost a couple of dollars. LOL Things were much simpler then and the hunters a hell of a lot tougher.