Rattler

I believe the reason deer are not spooked by horses is they know horses are not a threat. However, the reason a hunter can approach a deer while riding a horse is because deer hear a horse approaching, not a man. The sound of the horse's four hooves on the forest floor is what tells deer a horse is approaching. If you use a cut out and try walking closer to deer, I think they will spook because it won't sound right to them. It may work as a blind to hide behind, but I doubt it will allow you to approach deer without spooking them. They will not hear what they expect to hear and will know something is wrong. It is true hunting on horseback will allow hunters to approach very close to deer without spooking them, but that's because the deer hear a horse coming.

To clarify this new tax, for decades, if someone purchased an item from a mail order catalog, like Sears, the seller was not required to collect sales tax for the state the item was being shipped to. If anything, they should have been collecting the sales tax required by the state it was sold in. How it was ever decided that catalog sales would not require any sales tax I do not know. Online sales simply followed the catalog sales playbook. Politicians have been salivating over catalog & online sales taxes for years, just trying to get up the nerve to implement it. They feel they are entitled to a commission on everything that is sold in this country, as if they had any positive impact on the sale of any goods in this country. Sales taxes do not do anything positive for the economy and they are not collected to pay any expenses the government incurs in the sales process. They are simply a means of grabbing money the government feels is palatable to the public, based on the lie the government needs the money in the general fund to run the government. The trouble is, the government always expands it's expenses needed to run itself beyond whatever revenue it can extort from taxpayers. The more tax revenue it collects, the more it spends. The more it spends, the more it needs the tax revenue. Once the public agrees to give them these taxes, they will become permanent, with no hope of them ever being eliminated and no hope of the government ever reducing it's spending. The worst part of all this is, people start buying less. That hurts the sellers and the economy. So, in actuality, the government is hurting the citizens, the businesses and the economy, for it's own self centered greed. Any tax collected for any reason, that is not absolutely required to run the basic requirements of government, is theft. Politicians who demand more taxes without first cutting all wasteful government spending, are thieves.

To me it's really a simple issue once you remove the emotion and politics involved. There are too many wolves in many areas and they have become a problem. They are protected where they are a problem. They should no longer be protected. If ranchers are allowed to take out problem wolves, that will reduce their numbers where they create problems. There is no threat of wiping out the wolves out there anymore. They will still be there but in far more manageable numbers. Plus, wolves are very intelligent. Once they lose protected status and start getting shot for attacking sheep, cattle and pets, they will learn to avoid those animals in the future. They do it now because it's an easy meal without consequence. Once they learn that meal can have deadly consequences, they will revert back to hunting meals that they should be hunting.

I don't see how. A Coexist bumper sticker won't make it work. What's your plan?

Well, one creates a huge expense for taxpayers and one contributes huge revenue to the economy and wildlife conservation. Which one would you choose? BTW, it was the hunting revenue that was spent to re-introduce these wolves.

The special interest groups defend wolves, grizzlies and mountain lions. These animals kill a lot of other game animals. The special interest groups are also anti hunting. How are those groups allowed to decide what predators are allowed and what damage they will be allowed to do? I can't help but suspect this has much to do with eliminating hunting from the wildlife management plan. If game animals become scare due to predators, hunters will be the ones who are told they can no longer control the population of these animals. Considering all of the revenue generated by hunters in many areas of the economy, as well as contributing to state coffers, that would be and economic disaster that may be irreversible.

Just deport all of these people where ever, and when ever we find them. The longer they are allowed to stay here, the harder it is to deport them. Chances are they entered illegally because they would not have qualified to enter legally. Any nation that doesn't control it's borders, will ultimately lose it's sovereign nation status. It becomes balkanized, segregated and no longer united. That causes infighting and friction. Eventually, the wars between the different cultures begin and you can never stop it. That's what happened in the Soviet Union when it collapsed and that's what will happen in the US if it's allowed to continue. Leftist Progressive Marxists support open borders, amnesty and drivers licenses for illegals because it benefits their cause, which is obtaining power. That alone should be enough to stop it.

This is all about money. NYS elected hacks simply want to reduce the number of inmates so they can save money. Meanwhile, they put all of the citizens at risk. That is exactly the opposite of what they have been elected to do. Prisoners today who are 55 years old aren't elderly either. Some of these guys work out with the weights every day and are strong as an ox. Maybe they should only be allowed to do this if the elected hacks are forced to allow every responsible law abiding citizen in NYS to carry a concealed weapon and not even need a permit to do it. They would rather give freedom to killers while taking freedom from us.

Nobody says have no wolves at all. Why do people think that is what is being requested? They need to reduce their numbers dramatically. Why are wolf supporters fighting that solution? It's not complicated at all. It a political issue. Right now the solution is not being implemented. It is being actively fought by special interests. There is simply a program to throw money at a problem, that is getting bigger and more expensive by the year. The losses include cows, sheep, dogs and Elk, as well as other wildlife. We hunters should be looking at the damage to hunting and it's related industries here. The losses amount to a couple hundred million a year. If anyone were to make a decision in the private sector that cost all of their neighbors that kind of money, they would be sued for damages in a heartbeat. How about if only people who want to compensate ranchers, or defend the losses to all involved, fork over the money? Does the government have a right to install an expensive, inefficient, wasteful program, with a cost to ALL taxpayers, to satisfy people who want an immense population of wolves? Basing environmental decisions on emotion, always costs taxpayers huge amounts, because they are not based on science. The people who want wolves are often the same people who demand we all look at the science behind climate change, yet conveniently ignore science in cases like this. Wolf re-introduction without any controls, was a mistake. Fighting the solution is a mistake. Wishing the wolves won't do what wolves do is fantasy. The numbers must be reduced.

Wyoming issues.

As hunters, this film has some data that should be of interest to us. How does the government introduction of apex predators affect hunting opportunity. That can be seen here at the 2:20 mark.

Twenty-three years ago, the United States started an experiment: What would happen if U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service released grey wolves in the West? The results are mixed. To their credit, wolves have successfully controlled the grass-munching elk and deer populations of the Northern Rockies. That means they also leave more habitat available for other species, from bugs to beneficial algae. But wolves aren’t picky. And ranchers’ cows make for easy targets. In states like Idaho, where wolves were released two decades ago, ranchers can protect their herds by killing wolves, and the states allow wolf trophy hunts to further thin packs. But in Oregon, ranchers are caught between the wolves killing cows on their grazing grounds and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, which has strict rules against killing wolves in all but the rarest circumstances. Ranchers who keep losing cattle to wolves, and the residents of Eastern Oregon who rely on the economy created by the cattle industry, have long argued the state of Oregon should loosen the rules around wolf kills, and let ranchers kill whole packs of wolves. For the first time, last year, the state allowed for just that — four wolves from the Harl Butte Pack of northeastern Oregon were killed. Environmentalists decried the wolf killings as unnecessary and cruel. Ranchers here hope it’s just the start.

The wolves were on the endangered species list for far too long. Special interest groups vigorously fought taking them off the list and allowing hunting. Even now, the number of wolf hunting permits is far too low to control them and most are taken as targets of opportunity by Elk hunters. In areas where Elk were too numerous, they should've allowed more Elk hunting. Letting the wolves take them down helped control the Elk population, but is now over controlling that population, as well as the cattle and sheep in those areas. The reality of the situation, which the government is just starting to understand, is that wolves are apex predators that are very intelligent, adaptable, wary and extremely hard to control with hunting and trapping. They also breed very intensively. The old timers who lived in these areas 100 years ago understood this and spent many years getting these predators under control. Allowing the emotions and faux science of animal special interest groups to drive the decision making process for re-introducing them, was a politically correct decision that has proven to be a huge mistake. The government allowed the situation to get way out of control and now it's costing millions a year to try to get it under control.

The wolves were in those areas, but it was 100 years ago, but not in the numbers that are there today. Much has changed since then. Special interest groups pushed to re-introduce them, but they didn't have the foresight to see what would happen, or were not saying what they knew. The locals were against it from the start, fearing it would cause problems, but even they are surprised how big the problems are.

They use the Collies to keep the herd together. Do those Anatolian Shepards do that too?

More about wolf issues in Idaho.

Another example of a government feel good policy that turned into a total disaster for all who are touched by it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INZZSt0kp4w

It is definitely a Royal model and it has auto ejectors. This one recently sold on the Galazan website for $2200.

This is my JP Sauer 16ga Royal. I acquired it about 13 years ago. Barrels are 70 cm and choked full and IM. It does not have a cheek piece and never had sling swivels. Case hardened frame and triggers. It is NOT FOR SALE. Considering it's only worth about $2000, I would say it qualifies as the common man's quality SXS. I believe it is of 1950's manufacture, but not sure. Anyone know how I can find out the date of mfg? I appreciate any assistance offered. Thanks.

Pew Research, which has tracked the undocumented population for several years, pegs the total number of undocumented immigrants at about 22.1 million nationwide in 2018. In Southern California, about 3.4 million undocumented immigrants live between the southern Ventura County border and the U.S.-Mexico border — the biggest concentration of undocumented people in the country. Considering the total population of that area, it's a pretty good bet many of the people you observe there are illegal. It's not so much racial as it is statistical.

That is actually a very minor part of the issue. If you don't see that, you are part of the problem.

Considering the fact that the vast majority of illegals crossing the southern border are non-whites, I wouldn't say observing a huge non-white, non-english speaking amount of people near the southern border and presuming them to be illegal, is racist. I would call it presumptuous. Feeling they are a problem because of the color of their skin would be racist. Feeling they are a problem because they are illegals who have entered our country without approval or background checks and may be criminals, parasites or pedophiles, is not.

Shot the first one the other day behind the house with a 20 gauge and #6 shot at about 15 yards.

Closest deer kill? How far is straight down? It was right under my tree stand when it came to a stop. I have had deer come so close when posted up against a tree, that I smacked them with my hand, but didn't shoot them. I have never taken a really long shot at a deer in my nearly 50 years of deer hunting. The woods I hunt make seeing a deer over 100 yards very rare. My longest shot was only 100 yards or so. Many bow killed deer have been within 10 feet. Longest bow shot was 40 yards. My first turkey came in to my calling behind two big trees in front of me about 10 feet away. Never got a glimpse of him till he stuck his head out around the trees. Blew his waddles off with my brand new Mossberg 835 3.5" magnum and #4 shot. Talk about over kill. LOL! Never had a turkey come within 50 yards before that. Really had me laughing about buying the gun when that happened. Longest shots I've ever made were at woodchuck and coyote. 300 yards probably the farthest.

A funny side note about the taxist this year. When I went to pick it up, the daughter brought out the wrong mount. When I said it was not my deer, she said her father's handwriting and numbers were so bad she couldn't read the number right. I was #3441 and she had #3471 in her hands. A buddy nearby told me a friend of his used the same guy and picked up a mount he is sure isn't his, but the taxists said it was. He keeps looking at his pics and at the mount and swears it's the wrong one. LOL! I told him what happened to me and advised him to go back. Someone has his, or it's still in the shop. Can't imagine what a mess that would be for the hunters. The guy needs to improve his handwriting to fix this problem. Perhaps putting a name on the claim check would be a good idea too.