Death From Above

Not sure if you have bought a tractor or not yet, but if you are still looking around, I thought I'd throw in a vote for Kubota. I currently own (2) tractors, a 50H New Holland and a 38H Kubota. I have owned JD as well. I bought the NH brand new six years ago, and I have had the Kubota for more than 12 years now. The Kubota was already 15 years old when I purchased it. I have put more than 3x as much $ into my NH in the past (6) years than I have in my Kubota in more than (12) years - and the Kubota is almost 20 years older. Obviously not every NH or Kubota is the same, but I can say for sure that my next new tractor will be a Kubota.

So I didn't watch this video, because I have seen similar ones. BUT, they all should come with a "Please do not try this at home" warning! Maybe this video did, as I said I didn't watch it. However, just thinking about it makes me nervous after what happened to me. If I could be an example to anyone contemplating this...please read my story below... I have a Synergy myself, and love showing friends that trick when I hang it from my digital scale (same one pictured in the video above) as it sits at full draw on its own - but I NEVER take my hands completely off the bow. Well, a few weeks ago I was doing a little tuning and decided to check my draw weight, so I put it in the scale and pulled it down. As the Synergy does, it dropped into the valley and at the wall it just sat there. Awesome as always. Then it happened. I let off the bow and it wouldn't let back down. I proceded to do something really stupid at that point. I just gave it little "jiggle" or shake, trying to get the bow to take over and the cams to kick in. However, all that happened was my string went slack and then my loop popped right off the hook. I new instantaneously that I was in trouble. Whack! Dryfire. So now I have my scale clipped in to a O-ring off the truss above me, and another carabiner to attach to the loop. I even have another safety rope from the scale to the string incase the lop breaks. I took the bow apart completely to look everything over, and got lucky as there was no damage. Took quite a few shots through it before I could get rid of that pucker factor waiting for something to explode due to damage. Too many horror stories I guess from other dryfires. All that to say...enjoy your Synergy, I like mine a lot! Just be careful showing off that bow hanging at full draw on its own, or you might be in danger of doing something as stupid as I did.

Wow...3br...? why don't we just kill them all and get it over with.

I'd love to see something done to balance or buck to doe ratio, and I think that one of them would work quicker than the other (OBR). But I see your point. When I lived in PA I couldn't wait for opening morning, and all I could think about was shooting a nice buck. However, deep inside I wasn't sure if I wanted to shoot one early, because that meant I was done hunting for the year. That simple thought probably pushed me towards passing young bucks a lot more than just wanting to shoot a big one, or being a "trophy hunter". I really wanted to just keep buck hunting, and if I shot one early that was it. Luckily I could come back to my original home in NY to hunt as well. Like everyone, I find it hard to not look at these ideas without focusing on how it affects me personally. I typcially shoot 4-6 does each year, and my family of seven eat all of them in a year's time. Yes that means two freezers, and we don't buy much beef. My kids think beef steak tastes funny. However, I don't shoot many bucks because I try to shoot 3.5s or older, and that doesn't happen for me every year (I bow hunt only). I wish it would kill one every year, but I am picky I know, and I just like to use the bow more than the gun. I think I probably shoot a buck every other year in NY, but luckily I have much better luck hunting in other states for bucks with my bow. So it is hard for me to imagine using two buck tags in NY, but I realize for others it is different. If larger bucks are the goal, AR would be the deal. If more bucks in the herd are desired, its OBR. However, both will help accomplish both goals IMO, eventually.

Stubby, I am in complete agreement. I'd take OBR over AR in a heart beat. I am not arguing its merit, just the merits of Growalot's statements as I outline above.

Funny, they were your words, not mine. BTW, you don't have to speak. You could just type.

That's called compromise. See non AR supporters are willing to say hey if it is actually close to being for herd health, we are willing to compromise and drop a buck tag. Where AR supporters want the power to be dictators and there is no compromise in a dictatorship. It's all or nothing. More and bigger racks is all that will squelch their need to be top dogs. Mathewzshooter...if you want to fit in you need to learn how snide really is worked..lol I am sorry, but I just have to call complete and utter BS on that post Grow. I can't wait to see how you will twist this back around, but oh well, I couldn't let it go. You paint a rosy portrait of the "non AR supporters" you put your self among, as a group, as willing to compromise and consider the OBR. Your WHOLE ENTIRE argument is based on the fact you don't want someone to tell you, or legislate for you what you can shoot. You do not want choice or opportunity taken away. You advocate for no change and all choice. Now you want us to believe that as a group the "non AR supporters" would be for the OBR? This would take away your opportunity and choice to take a second buck. It further regulates what you can harvest. You DON'T WANT regulations, remember? You want it to stay the way it is cause you say that it is fine as it is right now. You argue repeatedly that herd health isn't vital in this decision, and now you suggest that you are on the side of compromise for the good of the herd? I have seen plenty of favorable mention of OBR, and the majority have been from those in favor of change. Its been from those in favor of AR, from those improving the buck to doe ratios, and herd health. But you suggest that anyone advocating AR is instead just looking for dictatorship. There are many advocates of AR who simply want more bucks in the herd to survive another year and you now suggest that they are completely against OBR? And yes, there are certain to be AR supporters who just dream of big bucks. But if one side of this argument was in favor of compromising to OBR, I have to assume it wouldn't be the side that is mostly concerned about whether or not someone has limited their opportunity to pull the trigger. I'm willing to bet that if this topic was on changing to OBR, and AR wasn't part of the discussion, you'd be singing the same tune about not changing something that is fine as it is. Just doesn't sound like compromise to me. If somehow, I am incorrect on this, then I apologize ahead of time to any "non AR supporters" that feel differently. But your comments above don't jive with what has been written over, and over, and over, and over in this thread and the NEW one that just popped up. Like the new thread was needed.

That would make us like just about every other state. Which I agree would be an improvement. No where to go but up.

Pretty sure I stated above that AR was not the best tool to accomplish this task. Your response is also just an example of what else that I said above. It simply can't be about improving our lousy buck to doe ratio can it? It has to be about you and your desire to pull the trigger. And now I am in your eyes wrong for wanting to benefit the herd by attempting to promote some change that would improve a deficit of bucks that we as hunters produce. All because I'd like to see more bucks overall in the herd, which has benefits to our deer herd. Sorry, I see improving our deer herd as more important that what you or I get to shoot. Guess I differ on which side of that equation is the selfish side. You somehow think that a desire to improve herd ratios is a crazy idea to frustrate hunters? Really? That is the goal, to frustrate hunters? So what now, I advocate a smaller buck harvest until we improve one of,if not the worst buck to doe ratio in the country....so maybe, just maybe you will quit hunting so I can have more bucks to myself? Guess my true motives just got revealed. The sad thing is that you say this "pop-fad" tool or any other one designed to allow for a change to our herd structure would ruin hunting. You can't even see the possibility that it might improve hunting in NY regardless if John or Joe get to kill the bigger rack bucks they so desperately want. Cause once again it doesn't matter to you. You could care less about considering potential changes to seasons or bag limits that might be better for our deer. All that matters is that you get to kill whatever you want to, and apparently don't experience any frustrations in the process.

Well, if you somehow implied something other than I should "jerk off with my horns" after I brag about them, because there is no reason for AR other than commercial hunting, and no plausible benefits to our deer herd...then you might be right....I somehow misread it. ?

Wow, intelligent post. Great mental imagery. If you, or the person who's post you quoted can't see that AR would cause some bucks to live longer, then not sure you should partake in this conversation. The point of AR is to help some bucks live longer, so that you don't send a bullet at them. Can you not understand that? No bullet into deer = deer not killed = equals deer live longer. Did that help? Now if you or the quoted poster cannot understand how allowing bucks to live longer might benefit the herd, then so be it. It might be out of your reach I guess. Either that or it doesn't jive with your "greed" to shoot everything you want to, so you write stuff like you just did and call relevant biology bunk.

I wish,. If you think AR would cause and uproar, just wait till there is talk about a one buck rule, shorter seasons, etc. Unfortunately any changes to the buck to doe ratio would require limiting the current seasons and bag limits we now have. If the balance of our herd ever got to a point that the DEC felt they had to intervene its gonna be painful for some hunters. This AR debate is a prime example. While AR is not the solution, it could be a step towards rectifying the issue. Changes like these would obviously not be popular to everyone, so I see it as a steep hill to climb. Apparently, even though the DEC agreed that there were good reasons to encourage selective harvest of bucks, they did not want to tackle the issue either.

You bet. I think there are MUCH better ideas than AR to help our deer herd.

There are probably a lot of things that NYS could do for "herd health", and maybe your example of creating ponds might be one of them. I can't say for sure how many things could be of help. But, I can say, that in most, if not all of NYS our buck to doe ratio is not ideal. You say that AR might put "more bone on the head", and I say that would probably be true. Estimated harvest numbers came out again today from the DEC, and as usual we kill a lot more bucks than does. Hidden in that number is the fact that 15-20% of the antlerless take are buck fawns. Add to that the fact that mortality rates are higher on bucks than does in general not including deer that are wounded and not found/reported. All this adds to a continued lopsided ratio of does to our bucks. More bucks would be good for the herd. More bucks equals more likelihood of older bucks, this is once again good for the herd (see length of rut, dates of conception, less stress on each buck, fawn predation, fawn winterkill, etc.). If AR was implemented there is a more than reasonable chance that we would increase the number of bucks that make it through the year, which only can help the two scenarios I mentioned above. Argue all you want about bone on the head, and you can also say that with AR we are not saving our somehow "genetically better" young bucks, it doesn't matter. Whether you want to agree, or you can understand it, AR would have more benefits than just more bone on the head, or bone on the wall. The question is whether that it is important enough to put AR in place to help any of this or not. I am guessing that it isn't to the DEC regardless of what they push in their "DEC Delivers" propaganda.

Exactly, I am not telling you what to shoot. Shoot what you want. I'd like to hunt the way I'd like to as well. The reason I have probably 50 posts on these AR threads, but haven't said that I am in favor of AR being legislated in NY is because of the choice issue. I get it. I know that many do not want choice taken from them. However, to me choice does not override what is best for our deer, and if imbalance becomes too much of an issue and legislation is needed then I am all for it - whether than means AR, shorter seasons, OBR, whatever. Imbalance of buck/doe ratios or not, I now fully realize (after reading all these pots about the subject) that it wouldn't matter what proof was out there, or how much evidence was easily seen, none of the factors that could possibly arise would overcome many hunter's simple desire to keep the choice in play. There is nothing powerful enough for some to look past their own rifle scope. That I now see. I also see that you, and many others, only see the "opposition" as elitist and unethical, non-traditional trophy hunters. If AR ever does get put into play in NY, I hope it is because of biological reasons/benefit, and not due to who screams the loudest. However, it doesn't appear that the implementation of AR or other rules could ever appear to be done for the right reasons to a great majority of our hunters. How it effects the deer herd is now of little relevance, and in many eyes not worth considering. If it goes against what they want then there simply can be no validity to it.

I have no idea if you are a hunter, but I know that I am. What bothers me is that you don’t want to “be told what to shoot”, but you want to tell me how I should hunt. I love venison, and I feed my family of (7) with it. But I have shot enough young bucks that I don’t find challenge in shooting them, so I don’t. If there was no challenge in hunting, then why do it? If you don’t like the challenge it provides then you can go to your grocery store and buy your meat. Why condemn me for wanting to shoot an older buck. Maybe I perceive challenges in different ways than you do. I love filming the smaller bucks under the tree, and watching them walk by, just don’t have the slightest desire to shoot one. I don’t care if you prefer to shoot that same deer. Why is wrong for me to pass it. You say I am not a real hunter for doing so? Really. I bet the guys that shoot many of the bucks I pass are happy that I did so. So I prefer to bow hunt, because of the CHALLENGE (once again). I want them close, I like the exhilaration that shooting even a doe with the bow provides. It is harder for me to shoot a doe with my bow than a buck with my rifle. I don’t walk to them, or push them to someone else to shoot. I have to figure out where my best chance to shoot a deer is by picking the stand before the deer even gets there. But if I put effort in advance to choose mhy ambush point you cry foul - somehow I am not a hunter anymore. Here’s proof for you though that I am not a hunter, as you put it. I’m building one of those deer blinds you speak of right now for this fall. Lots of windows, the works, just so that I can take my three year old out with me and keep him warm when the chance provides itself. My nine year old watched me shoot a doe with my bow when he was four, out of one of those blinds that you say ruins hunting as we know it. He now climbs into ladder stands with me, cause he learned early to like to go along. Partly because I made the effort to keep him comfortable at an early age, in one of those blinds that you say ruins hunting. I hunt all year long. Sometimes with a gun, sometimes with a bow. Sometimes its for sheds, other times I let my trail cameras do some hunting for me. Sometimes I hunt for new stand locations, sometimes I hunt for deer sign. Sometimes I hunt for places to put food plots, and I work long hours growing food for the deer to eat both early and late. I love all of it, not just the part where I kill something for meat. I call all of this hunting. If you don’t, you might be missing out on some of the rewarding part that scouting and preparation provides. Or, you may only be doing the part of hunting that you enjoy. Hard for me to understand you say? Nope, think I have a pretty good idea about this hunting thing. I also have a pretty good idea that you only understand a small portion of it, and want to minimalize the rest because it doesn’t fit in your preferences.

Can you make up your mind? Are you defining for us what hunting is, or aren't you? You say no, you aren't, then you revise your definition, and state a new definition of what a hunter is once again. So now, by your new definition, I am a hunter if I either walk around and luckily walk into a deer to shoot it, or maybe skillfully track it down in the Adirondacks. But I am not a hunter if I plant food plots , use a trail camera, or want to learn about what the deer do on my property so that I can strategically intercept it on its normal travel patterns? Or are you saying I can only shoot a trophy deer in the Adirondacks, but I can't use a camera picture or have video proof to know it existed prior to hunting for it? I'm confused. Can I just be a hunter by the method that I prefer to use, provided it is legal?

So you are saying that if I enter the woods and do not shoot the first deer that comes into range I am not a hunter? Just a trophy gatherer? Man, my season would be over real quick, and not much of a challenge. That would suck. Glad I am not a hunter under your definition!

Seriously? Are we now concerned about gender discrimination when considering AR? Really? Like its unjust or unfair that hunters are concerned about letting the bucks get older and not the does? This sounds like a subject for the ACLU. Think about that for a second, please. Situation A. 10 does walk in the field, which one gets shot? 9 out of 10 hunters picks the biggest doe and shoot, which likely is one of, if not the oldest in the group. That typically means a doe older than 1.5. Situation B. 5 does walk by, which one gets shot? If the hunter can maintain their excitement and not shoot the first one (which is often an older doe anyways), they pick out which one? Likely the biggest doe once again and still is typically older than 1.5. Situation C. Two does come into range, which one is shot? Once again, most hunters shoot the bigger one, and if they are both does its typically the older of the two deer. This scenario (2 flatheads) often leads to a lot of button bucks getting shot from what I have seed or herd from hunting stories from friends, etc. Situation D. A lone doe walks out, does it get shot? If it appears to be a good size doe, many will shoot. If it looks like a fawn, many will pass. I still, after more than 30 years of hunting, try not to harvest lone does, even though I feel like I am a decent judge of deer age. Just not worth shooting a button buck to me personally. Situation E. One buck, and five does of assorted ages walk in a field, which one gets evaluated as the deer to shoot the most? The buck, in most scenarios. If they do not have a buck tag, or decide it is not a buck they want to harvest, which deer gets shot? Most would once again, shoot the largest doe. My point? Most hunters already shoot older does when provided a choice, whether it is on purpose or not. While there are all kinds of variables that affect the situations I provided above, I think it is within the realm of reason to assume that many, if not most hunters would already be practicing “doe age management” - if there is such a thing. I really never concerned myself about it until I read this idea here. I had no idea we should be concerned about this great injustice. Add the fact that there are simply so many more does than bucks out there in many parts of this state then it also seems fairly reasonable more does are provided the opportunity to grow older anyways. I think it is quite apparent that due to the quest of more meat, or “150 pound does”, and who knows what other reasons that we already are quite capable as a state to make decisions that means passing on younger does in favor of the older ones. AR’s are being suggested because it is the male deer that we as hunters don’t always look for older ones to harvest in the herd. YES, I KNOW THAT SOME DO NOT CARE ABOUT THIS FACT. So finally, five bucks walk out, which one gets shot? Once again just about every hunter shoots the biggest one unless they are on a canned hunt and have to pay some insane trophy fee. I know that was a crazy reach for an example of when a hunter might not shoot a largest racked deer…but hey, some of these pros and cons on display here for or against AR are just as little bit of a reach as well.

I think you are correct, the simply drew a straight line. That is what I am assuming, and the fact they don’t want to change it due to “tradition”. Still makes no sense to me as they make such an effort to break the “6’s” up and like you said, and provide DMPs for some areas and not others. It seems they would consider other changes as well, but apparently not.

Yes, I should have used ZONE instead of TIER. Old habit I guess of always saying tier instead of using the same reference the DEC uses. Not sure if you read my initial post or any of the ones after. I certainly understand why there is a long gun season in the northern zone, even said I understand the necessity for it. My question centered around the fact that there is at least one portion of the northern zone that doesn’t resemble the northern zone you described in either terrain or hunting opportunities. Hence my question as to why it offers the same structure of hunting seasons.

Congratulations!!! I’d be you are excited. My wife and I bought an old house, roughly 2200 square feet, and about 6 years later we added another 2000 to it with an addition like you mentioned. Being able to do a lot of the work certainly helped keep the price down though. The big thing is that I let her redesign her kitchen, and the addition we built saw a lot of her touches go in to it. The idea of her opportunity to kind of create her own space really helped keep her content for the first six years in that micro kitchen and 1860’s house. Good luck! BTW, I have purchased (3) pieces of land over the past 11 years, all related to my business. Closing in a few weeks on my first non-business land ever (besides a house to live in). That 125+ acres is for hunting! But of course, it goes in the business name anyways. Have to be creative in NY as a small business owner to survive. I have never killed a deer on land that I own. I am excited about that opportunity. I expect it to be rewarding in some way for sure. Here’s to hoping we both get to experience that for the first time this fall – if you haven’t already.

I agree in the fact it is a long season, just wonder why the gun season is so long here. If I spent a lot of time bow hunting where you hunt I would think I might sit a lot longer waiting for harvest opportunities. I understand why there is a short bow only season there. Sure, if it was my choice I’d like to see the deer season in areas like 6g follow the southern tier dates for bow/gun. I think it better fits both the habitat (lots of fields and ag land) and higher deer densities like the southern tier, and would be closer to what the majority of what is seen across the country. I am not sure where, but I am sure there are exceptions to this in some state, somewhere, it might be possible that there might be an 8-week gun season in an area with high deer numbers. Don’t know of many that limit the bow only season to 2 weeks, however. All that said, I don’t make the rules, just live with them. Guess if I was solely a gun hunter I might think it is great to have two months to shoot farm deer with a gun. I am just trying to figure out why the NYS DEC keeps this area on same “schedule”, as the rest of the Northern Tier. For a while I wondered if it might be due to lower human population up here, but I am not sure the area is any less populated than much of the rest of the state. If they manage different areas based on habitat and deer density for doe tags – as you mentioned with 6J – then one might think they would handle this area by a means that they see as important. I just can’t figure out what those reasons are. Seems more like southern tier hunting habitat and deer numbers to me…maybe we could be 7”G”…there are plenty of letters left, right? I imagine this topic would break on pretty sharp lines between bow and gun hunters, when considering whether one was for change or not, so that topic doesn’t merit too much discussion I’d say. It would only result in an argument for sure. The very fact that I am bringing it up points to the fact that I am likely a bow hunter. To me there is not much that compares to the peace and quiet of the archery season, especially when the deer seem to appreciate that quietness as well, and the rut gets kicked in. Having a gun season that goes through the majority of the rut is a completely different experience. Our deer seem to be skittish and on edge for two months straight. Again, mot your normal rut feel from what I have seen in the past 10+ years. Once again, I am just searching for the rationale behind the inclusion of this area into the Northern Tier's super long gun season. Thanks for responding by the way.

SalingHudson…what WMU do you hunt in mostly? Am I assuming correctly (username) that you are on the eastern side of the state? I can’t say whether or not $ is a factor in our area over here by Lake Ontario, but I would assume that deer hunting has a minimal impact here as far as $ to the area. That said I can imagine there are a lot of areas towards our east towards the Tug Hill Plateau that get see a good bit of travel and visitors during hunting season with all of the state land and camps. I would assume that hunters contribute $ that way for sure. Curious to hear if you would say that the area you hunt is mostly forest, resembling a more mountainous region like the ADK, or if it has a lot of farm land like we do over this way. I have to assume that the anwser to my question revolves mostly around tradition, but I am curious to hear if anyone else has reasons that I cannot think of why our area here, which has an awful lot of agriculture land similar to where I grew up in the southern tier, sports a gun season like the ADK park.

That is correct Growalot, you did type that a few pages ago. But then again, you have posted probably 9-10 ten more times again since then, and I suspect it might be possible that those posts were not all designed to calm down the debate or the discussions. Maybe everyone is just waiting for you to lead the way, and sing your swan song, and say good by the thread first. ??? Kidding grow, kidding.... While I may not have a lot of posts on this site, it doesn't mean that I haven't been reading a good bit on here over the past several years. I think that part of the reason I hadn't typically posted a lot was the fear of being dragged in to the depths on a few topics that I care deeply about (easy to see above as I couldn't help defending what I felt was an attack on the motives of many in our hunting ranks). For this reason I am the last to criticize the direction that this thread has gone, or keeps coming back around to. There is a lot of good stuff on this site as well, I believe. Some great thoughts, ideas, knowledge, suggestions, etc. My favorite might be viewing trail cam pics, seeing success pics and stories, and using info others provide on rut observation to see how they line up with what I am seeing from my stands. I'll even suggest that once in a while it is great to see the passion displayed that we have for our hunting here in NY. While a thread like this may not serve to change many minds, I hope it shows all of us that there are opinions and strong desires on both sides, and maybe we should consider them at times as somehow legitimate, even if they don't mirror our own beliefs or the theories we believe to be true. Whatever happens out of this topic, whether some legislative action goes through, or if "education" continues to be implemented in some fashion by the DEC...I just hope that it doesn't rip us apart too much along some sort of divide that would hurt our group of outdoor enthusiasts as a whole. Maybe if AR was ever to get passed, then this forum would serve another function...a place to vent. Currently, without AR in place, it seems that this goes on from the other side quite a bit right now. If AR or bag limits are not ever changed in NY, the deer will continue to live and most of us will continue to hunt them. Likewise, like I suggested within my first post 50 pages ago in this thread, if AR is put in place, the deer will continue to live and most of us will continue to hunt them. I have to believe that if it ever came to it, we as hunters would come together when absolutely necessary, and this thread isn't representative of a group that is incapable of agreeing and supporting each other when it becomes vital.