Curmudgeon

Mario - whatever you thought of him - was one of the smartest people I ever had the pleasure to talk to. I would probably say the same thing about Antonin Scalia.

And, if shot with a rifle, full of poisonous lead fragments. Below is a photo of crows on a lead-free carcass.

Thanks. Why couldn't I find that? Hmmmmmmmmmmm.

Reading the New York Outdoor News, I learned that the state Comptroller is alarmed by continuing cuts to DEC - http://www.outdoornews.com/December-2014/Audit-DEC-needs-more-resources/ This is the Comptroller's page on the report - http://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/dec14/121014b.htm My impression is the agency is demoralized. It has suffered a huge loss of institutional knowledge in recent years due to retirements. Anyone concerned about the environment in NYS should be concerned.

Thanks for the suggestions. The illegality of letting dogs roam in winter is something I was aware of but for some reason it didn't occur to me to pursue it. Even if the dog control officer cannot catch the dogs in the act, multiple time stamped photos would seem to be sufficient evidence to bring a case to local court. We know who "nominally" owns these animals. The law seems to be the easiest approach - at least initially. However, knowing who owns a dog doesn't always matter. When a dog census was done here some years back, one neighbor - with an unlicensed dog visible in the yard - blatantly told the person conducting the census that he did not own a dog. Before I asked the effective range question on this forum, I had done a google search and found that video. Amazing. The ECO told me the rubber slugs are really dangerous. My take was that if you are ready to resort to rubber slugs, you should use the real thing. Take great care to learn their minimum range. On the other hand, the rubber buckshot will just sting. The pain and noise make a problem bear avoid people and houses, thereby saving its life in the short term. I still don't know the buckshot's maximum range. It's time to do some testing.

"I asked about paintballs since I figured it would scare the dog off AND alert the owner that the dog was obviously someplace it was not wanted. I was told that I could be then hit with cruelty charges so I disregarded the idea." Jennifer - That's interesting. I once asked a DEC Wildlife Tech about paint balling problem deer so as to identify them during the season. He laughed and thought it was a good idea. We didn't discuss legality. Killing feral cats is also illegal. Here in Otsego County the SPCA will take these invasive, ecologically destructive predators off your hands but you have to pay them. They then euthanize them because as adults they cannot be socialized to humans. We had one that was chasing a Bald Eagle off the bait. I was hoping the eagle would kill and eat it but that didn't happen. Bald Eagles do kill and eat domestic cats but not this eagle and not this cat.

Considering the timing of this discussion, irony, serendipity and a wildlife tragedy intersected and brought me together with an ECO on Christmas day. After providing the requested service, I asked him about the rubber buckshot and bears (having already been convinced by some of you that using it on dogs and deer were a bad idea). He told me that DEC did give it out at one time for problem bears but liability concerns stopped them. (This left me imagining the many ways people might use it.) I asked about the legality of shooting a bear breaking into a camp. He said the problem they have is with people shooting bears they claim were trying to get into a home/camp when they were not. There is a dead bear that was shot in the yard. There is evidence the bear was a nuisance but none suggesting it tried to enter the house. I was left with the impression that killing a bear that is actually breaking into your house is perfectly acceptable behavior. He also seemed to encourage the use of rubber buckshot on these bears. However, he does not like rubber slugs because they cause serious damage. The minimum range he recommended was 15 yards. Any closer might penetrate skin. I still don't know the maximum distance.

Just to be clear, I am talking about a bear breaking into an occupied camp. Call any cop and ask him what you should do in this situation. The last time it happened, my mother went after the bear with a corn broom. It worked but it's nuts. The eagles are Golden Eagles. Not associated with that group. I talk to DEC staff regularly. I assure you all, I will do nothing about the dogs without consulting them. Re pet safety: This is the responsibility of the pet owner. Ranging cats are killed and eaten by coyotes and eagles. Dogs are shot, hit by cars and in one case in my neighborhood, poisoned after months of night-time barking - not by me but I suspect I know who. I've owned pets my whole life. They stay home.

Maybe you are right. Dogs are not wildlife but the shooting part might be a problem - even if no permanent damage is done. Back to plan A - the 5 gallon air tank, ball valve, long hose and nozzle under a pound of cayenne pepper: the remote controlled bear canister. The bear situation is different. It was in the camp next door last summer. I don't care if it is legal or not, a bear trying to get into the camp is a public hazard. BTW - These aren't someone's sweet house pets. This is the 3rd season of a 3 dog group. They range a long distance. The problem is, once they learned of the site, the distance matters little. Responsible owners keep their pets on their own property, especially after learning of a problem.

The deer were only a thought for my garden since they know exactly how far I can throw a rock. They show up on the cameras but just walking through. They do have thick fur - at least in cold weather. I never really handled any in the summer so don't know how dense it is. No FPS on the box. I'm thinking of experimenting with corrugated cardboard. At a range where it penetrates the cardboard, I'll figure I'm too close. If it doesn't dent it, I will figure I'm too far. Does that sound reasonable? The coyotes here are hunted and do not approach during the day. Even a IR camera flash sends them running - usually. Even if they feed, they become part of the data set - which isn't just about eagles. The domestic dogs - on the other hand - eat a lot and move bait all over. They have no concern with human smells.

Don't want to kill them, just frighten and sting them. My concern is long range. Some of the sites have blinds for eagle trapping. Blinds range from 25 - 80 yards distant depending upon available cover. The sites with the biggest problems are about 25 and 50 yards from the bait. A baited research site uses carcasses to draw in scavengers to a camera trap. Carcasses can be road-killed deer (properly licensed by NYSDEC Special Licenses Unit) or dead livestock. Go to http://www.appalachianeagles.org/ for more information.

I acquired some "Less Lethal" brand rubber buckshot to deal with a problem with domestic dogs at baited research sites. Does anyone know the effective range of this stuff? I am also keeping some in the cabin the Dacks where we have had bear problems. Would the effective distance be different for dogs, deer and bears?

Quinnipiac poll: Voters approve Cuomo's action 55 to 25%. http://polhudson.lohudblogs.com/2014/12/22/q-poll-ny-voters-support-fracking-ban/

THIS THREAD WAS A TEST. It was always a test. Read post #1 again. I explicitly stated it was a test in post #10. I'm sorry I didn't stop this pissing match yesterday. I was just too tired. When I received a PM from a woman last evening calling the mob attitude "misogynistic", I figured I better put a stop to it today. Misogynistic is a big word guys, google it. I set that tar baby out there and the mob couldn't resist. I knew Br'er Rabbit couldn't keep his hands off the tar baby. Papist tried to give him some cover in post #11 but that didn't work. What Br'er and the others didn't realize is that the tar baby was a woman. I've been referred to as a "sissy" and a "little boy". It was suggested that I might be a woman - as if that were a negative thing. So, the guy who stands up to the mob is the "sissy". The guy who offers himself as a lighting rod is a "little boy". This is supposed to be anonymous but that means nothing. Anyone taking key words from my posts and profile would have easily gotten my name in the majority of the top ten google posts. It's Tom Salo. So here I stand in front of a mob, calling them what they are "bullies", with a only a handful of people behind me, and they call me names as if I'm a coward. The members of the mob have no sisu. They are the cowards. They are hiding in the crowd. They are keeping this site from developing its potential. Its potential to be inclusive to all hunters. I want to thank Papist and Culver Creek for participating but not joining the mob mentality. When the going gets rough, I want you guys on my side - even if we disagree about some things. I want to thank Belo, Wildcat - and few others I am missing - for trying to insert sanity into the discussion. Mike Rossi - what can I say - you have my deepest respect. Many of you met my expectations. My biggest disappointment is nyantler. I had been growing to respect him. That respect is gone. Br'er Rabbit thinks he won. His blind spot is as big as his ego. He hasn't yet looked in the mirror to see what everyone else sees - he's covered with tar. I am going to say goodbye for now. I will be back sometime. I need to recruit allies for trying to open Harriman Park to bow hunting. I may have some other interests to bring to the forum. I probably will be monitoring it at times. I don't expect to be participating in general discussions. If you are a friend, feel free to PM me. I will log in and respond. I will share my private contact information with those who have common interests. If you love wildlife, if you don't see them as just moving targets, you may want to read my article in the current Conservationist. To the women on the site, I may have been the catalyst that exposed these raw emotions but they were there all the time. Now that the mob knows who I am beyond a shadow of a doubt, you can hate me by name. Here's a photo of my granddaughters and me so you will even know what I look like. Goodbye for now, Tom Salo aka Curmudgeon

Thanks Wildcat for making some sense. It isn't working but it is appreciated.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/18/nyregion/cuomo-to-ban-fracking-in-new-york-state-citing-health-risks.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=span-ab-lede-package-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

Sorry, your avatar looks like a man.

What if we switch the word "bullying" with the word "abusing" Has anyone noticed that not one woman has participated in this discussion?

Belo - VJP bowed out 3 post ago. Don't expect a response.

Maybe you are right. Maybe we should just call this a gun rights site and start a new hunting site - one that deals with conservation issues.

Okay. It isn't hypothetical. It is the situation I am in. Does that help?

You are correct about needing "thicker skin". And, calling out BS is one thing. Different values, and debates over whose science is better do not fall into the category of BS. Please let's not confuse legitimate differences of opinion with BS.

Wildcat - To be lectured this way on "Decorum and dignity" is the most ironic thing to happen to me all month.

WNY - Thanks for addressing the point. Many seem to miss the point of my more provocative posts. The ones I start always have a purpose. I do not post them just to see fireworks. The post on Mentoring Young Women discussed how one woman was treated at the gun club she joined. It may be yours (anyone's). The post on coyote and crow contests was about the public image of hunters. The post on ethics was about the public image of hunters. The post on Why People Hate Hunters was about image of hunters. This post is about how people who do NOT follow the party line are treated on this site. Thus, it is about whether new hunters - who have different values - will be welcomed. Since I try to always be civil (and apologize for any lapses) and rarely curse, I have no recollection of the rules. I have no need.

For nyantler, doc, culver and any others who can discern the subtleties of this issue, I have a request. Here is a hypothetical situation: You have a new hunter - maybe a woman. This person did not grow up with firearms. They do not understand gun culture. They learn what they need to know at a course. They buy a gun as a tool to hunt. They have been exposed to main stream media their whole life. They are environmentally conscious, politically liberal and concerned about pure food. Could someone explain to me how you would present the relationship between hunting and gun rights to this person? How do you convince them that gun rights is a compelling issue without scaring them, or, coming across as a zealot? How do you get them on your side?