phade

In my opinion there is no single answer to this - it all depends on the stand site, the path, the hunting area/deer, etc. I have laid rocks and even cinder blocks down to help quiet entry/exit. Even with leaf litter the hard/firm underfooting allows you to be much quieter than you would expect. There are alos spots where doing this imo is more dangerous than simply trying to get into the stand. Face it, sometimes the right choice is NOT hunting a stand because the conditions don't allow for a proper entry. Dead still with a light frost and potato chips crunching underneath you...might want to consider saving the spot for a slightly wet understory and a touch of wind.

done

Our corn is late here I think. It has come on strong recently but it's pretty late.

Cudde can put out a good cam from time to time. Wish they would have maintained their superiority from back in the film days. The new line is super small, which I am a fan of. THeir black flash needs to come along a little ways. Some reports of pretty crummy night pics with the black flash. Day pics look typical Cudde good.

Nice pics. What cams do you have? Besides the Cudde.

8H also happens to be where the regional HQ is. I participated in deer surveys for about 4-5 years. I had to drive around to the fields in the area I hunt at dusk and count the deer and break them up into categories. I got some neat reports from them on it. I'm sure they incorporated this info into their system. But there is still alot to be learned and done here in NY.

I legally killed 14,023 deer with my mind waves last year. I simply wished them dead once they got within my 1/4 mi. range. They toppled over and began field dressing themselves. In all seriousness, field judging deer is challenging for everyone. Sometimes mistakes are made and you instantly realize it. Heck I went through it last year. You can only try to do your best and if mistakes are made, roll on. It's not the end of the world. Any info to help improve the ability to field judge is welcomed by me. But, many times, I usually get to the "big enough" distinction quickly. Every once in a while it bites me.

Stay classy Meat Manager, stay classy.

You keep throwing spaghetti on the wall to see what sticks. Bottom line is you are acting like a blind mouse following an agency that is doing the same thing as before when it caused a major mismanagement of the deer resource. You didn't even know we had a big issue with over-issuing tags ten-twelve years ago. You didn't even know Ohio has a comprable hunter density. You sir, should look in the mirror before casting stones. And, they are going crazy. Doing the same thing and expecting different results. How about actually doing some management instead of mismanagement? Do something other than "let's throw tags at them" again.

You must not realize that Ohio's hunter density is actually one of the highest in the country and just behind the states most people think of, including NY. People automatically assume the density doesn't compare, but shockingly....it does. NY ranks 3rd in hunter density, and Ohio ranks 5th. That's right, 5th. 2 spots behind NY. Fact. PA RI NY WI OH I'm not overlooking anything. Note that two of the top five pressure states are also two of the highest ranking for big buck states - with WI being the #1 state for book bucks for a long time. So again, how is our pressure different from theirs that makes our ability to produce high quality hunting similar or even ballpark on their level? Ding Ding Ding.... Ohio's management system is fluid. They make changes when needed. Rarely is the the doe management done in the same fashion for more than a year or two, and oftentimes, they make annual changes (not just upping or downing tags) ranging from zone alotments, inserting seasons and varying lengths. People say Ohio isn't comparable to NY. Bullcrap. It has near similar hunter density. It has similar soil quality (Draw a line from NE Ohio to SW Ohio). Top left habitat has soil quality akin to eastern NY. Bottom right is equivalent to western NY. You could practially lift Ohio's laws and put them in NY and we'd be way better off, even with no modifications or tweaks. I'm sure some could be made, but in large, Ohio outclasses NY with a similar enviornment and density. Human density has no bearing on doe management or numbers management other than distance laws/safety laws. None of which apply to the DEC throwing more tags at a sinking ship.

My pen is huge.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that doing the same thing time and time again will give you the same results. They haven't changed a THING since they screwed up last time. Their response is "We screwed up. Let's issue more tags again." Other states have much better models to work with. Ohio's system being one of them. Perfect? No, but also not stuck in the dark ages like NY. NY ranks in the top 3 or top 5 (I forget which) of agencies with deer-dedicated personnel. Yet, their arguably at the bottom of the heap from a management perspective. I know Jeremy is a good guy. He is handcuffed by the politics. It still doesn't change the fact they continue to do the same thing and expect different results or different engagement from the hunting public.

Love me some Beers of the World. I really like Belgian/White Ales and Summer Ales. Some of my favorites: Harpoons Summer Ale and UFO Goose Island - darn near anything they make, but especially their summer ale Sapporro (not really a craft beet, just foreign).

I'll hunt with you Larry. LOL. Let me know how it goes this season. I'll do the same.

Yes, thanks Grow. I am glad you provided that data, lol. They misstepped big time because their ability to manage deer numbers is pee poor. Throwing tags at it is EXACTLY how it happened the first time. They increased tags the same fashion, double digit %. And, they are not doing a single thing different this time around. The DEC's intention at that time was NOT to knock it down to 180K. It's taken ten years...TEN! to just get back to the 240s. They wiped the herd out drastically in some parts of the state. Anyway you slice it, the DEC was at fault, they admitted it, they are doing the same thing ten years later, and nothing different. Yet, you claim that they just "need a chance" to act on their words. Get real. You knock hunters who won't take a doe (which is their decision), and predict the sky falling. Yet, you didn't even know the DEC already burned hunters in the last decade doing the same thing. Can you blame them for not trusting the data, nor wanting to fill every tag no matter what? Seriously.

They've been saying that for years and years and still no action. Basically, you are saying to "give them a chance." Duh, they've had chance after chance and still don't do anything different than throw more gas (DMPs) on the fire. Were you not hunting when the deer population fell of the cliff? If you were, you'd remember it. Total take in bold on right. This was caused by the DEC's mismanagement. Period. They even admitted it. Look you keep whining about deer numbers - and we're still not even close to what the height was 12 years ago. A little perspective goes a long way. 2013 114,716 22,395 88,634 17,822 243,567 2012 118,993 20,263 86,644 17,057 242,957 2011 110,002 19,793 82,090 16,474 228,359 2010 106,960 21,131 84,806 17,203 230,100 2009 102,057 19,710 84,330 16,701 222,798 2008 105,747 20,000 79,953 17,279 222,979 2007 104,451 21,096 76,367 17,227 219,141 2006 96,569 18,336 60,102 14,101 189,108 2005 89,015 16,373 61,179 13,647 180,214 2004 88,733 21,022 80,196 18,455 208,406 2003 107,533 26,883 94,376 24,296 253,088 2002 128,292 36,958 113,317 29,649 308,216

Again, you are confusing the two components. Hunter choice and enforcement. IF the DEC were really concerned, there would be changes in the way they manage the population. Instead, they keep kicking up the same old system. Let's add another XX% to the XX% we issued last year. They did this once before in the last decade and the deer numbers came crashing down. This is showing they haven't learned anything from that mistake - which they admitted. Words on paper and actions taken are very different. If someone wants to pass a doe and hold out for a buck, so be it. Your take on it is just as skewed as theirs.

If the state has 1 main reason, they'd be enforcing things a little bit differently, don't you think? I don't see any doe required harvests if you buy a tag.

Based on our current rate of return, we are estimating a minimum 12 week return time from the point of receiving your firearm. Word from the horse's mouth....

People hunt for different reasons. That's the great thing about hunting. You can do what pleases you within the confines of the sport.

Where are you? Might make it easier. I have a few climbers I might part with, but I won't want to get into shipping them.

I really thought LFN would have topped out a little more than he has by now. His early pics (years ago) I thought he'd be a beast by 5. I don't mean a solid buck, I mean a friggin beast. Just goes to show you can't map out the future.

Water is a death sentence. Cams below the Reconyx line do not generally have coated internals. The damage you see is less than the damage you don't. It's just a matter of time if not promptly taken care of. The problem is that cams soak outside for a longtime in conditions that change (humidty/temp rises and falls), making it likely that the internals are going to start corroding quickly before you can do anything about it.

I agree that they should allow people to use DMPs if they are killing the does, but it is a slippery slope. The limit for the two consigned DMPs is stupid imo, but I also understand why they do that. I think they should offer a similar program to 8C or other units. Shoot a doe, gather evidence in some fashion, and get a DMP reissued. That way they can monitor the extra take beyond the alloted DMP tags and not deal with consignment issues.

Only fpund one tree with apples this year and itll.be cleaned put by opening day. Rest are bare.