Let's throw some gas on the fire - MI Report

[Five Seasons]

 

You just cant possibly stop trying to put words in my mouth, can you? What I quoted had nothing to do with crossbows, go look.

 

Oh, and Im an officer in the local branch of the QDMA (which is why I was at the Leadership Summit), so you have no clue as to what you are talking about on that either. I just dont list what organizations I belong to in my signature. You really do make yourself look like a buffoon when you start assuming and saying that someone said something they never did.

 

 

 I went back and looked. Here is your response to my statement below. I guess I'm a buffoon then. If you didn't mean it, you should be careful what you quote.

 

If someone can point out some individuals who have quit hunting because they cannot use a crossbow then maybe I'm wrong. But hunters will still hunt. Ours rules and regs have been modified several times and we as hunters simply adapt. Few quit. If you don't love it enough to adapt, then you weren't a serious hunter to begin with.

 

BTW, the QDMA numbers are inflated by things that they count in there like "hunters that dont hunt every year", etc.

Sounds like a great organization if their officers bash their own study's and reports not to mention don't advocate ARs which they put right in their mission statement. Glad I turned down an offer to join.

Edited March 28, 2013 by Belo

[Four Season Whitetail's]

I think it goes a lot farther than just an argument about license sales. I believe that of the current license holders, the average hunter is not putting in the time that they used to. To me that is more of a problem to the sport of hunting than changes in license sales. It shows that the problems of hunting popularity goes way beyond weapons choices, or hunter recruitment, or season lengths, or any other of those superficial so called cures. Basicly what we have is a social shift away from hunting, and there may not be any cure for that. There is no permanent way to cater to hunter laziness and lack of interest. You can sell all the licenses you want, but you can't force people to use them.

 

Kinda off subject and will not get into a pissin match with anyone but i believe this is the way of the world and one reason high fence hunts are a huge growing industry. I know for a fact that many places in Ny did not have enough bucks for the demand.  Have heard this all across the country.  People just want stuff fast and done now.  It is not a good thing for sure but i believe with land gettin ate up in houses or lease and public land with no deer the hunter numbers will keep falling!

[Five Seasons]

What compounds this is a lack of conservation ethic or a good enough understanding of conservation by influential people in the sporting community. It is further compounded by the Outdoor Writers Association which publishes material more redundant than this thread. Then it is compounded again, by selfishness and age. The leadership is self serving and old. Planting oaks which may not bare mast for thirty years isn't to exciting to the 50, 60 or 70 year old know-it-all who wont be around or able to hunt when habitat projects begin to bare fruit (pun intended).

 

I'm not sure I follow your point. It sounds like you're stating these organization are not interested in conservation?

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Belo, you are wrong on QDMA's position on AR's They will only support them if 3 considtions are met. In NY they have not been met so they do not support MANDATORY AR's. I do support letting the young bucks wallk but do not support mandatory AR"s. I believe WNY is the same. Also him pointing out a flaw in a report is  not bashing the organization.

[Five Seasons]

I was about to say something about that, they don't like that it has gone over and over but they keep coming back just to give an opinion that they are tired of reading the same argument. I don't get it, if you don't like the subject anymore why keep reading or opening it up?

 

i need a cup of coffee at work before I can function. Helps pass the time

 

[Five Seasons]

Belo, you are wrong on QDMA's position on AR's They will only support them if 3 considtions are met. In NY they have not been met so they do not support MANDATORY AR's. I do support letting the young bucks wallk but do not support mandatory AR"s. I believe WNY is the same. Also him pointing out a flaw in a report is  not bashing the organization.

 

listen. I figured you'd respond to that post. But i believe your organization puts a lot of time, effort and money into that report and therefore touts it highly. Am I wrong? Do you not think it looks bad for an officer to publicly claim it as inaccurate? Whether it's true or not? I'm an advocate for the QDMA.

 

I guess I just don't see why this guy seems to nit pick at any report or fact that doesn't report his side. Referring to his own observations on number of trucks at state land as why he thinks numbers are declining. These kind of observations and statements are the type of things that would get you laughed out of the room at a board meeting at my company. You need data and statistics to support your argument. How do you know more people aren't hunting private land vs state land? How do you know people haven't been tagging out early and spending less time in the woods? How do you know hunting is up in some areas and down in others due to the economy or housing in the area? How do you know people aren't buying hunting camps in other areas and just "hunting elsewhere"? I've seen more pumpkins the last 2 years in the nice n' easy in Tully valley than I have in the past but I can't use this observation in my argument about increasing numbers. Don't forget upstate has been shrinking in population since the 1950's.

 

we had a very lengthy discussion on ARs a while back. Saying you do not support yearling buck harvest but dont support ARs is a bit of a stretch. I think you'll remember which side I'm on. I guess I don't see how you can ever enforce yearly protection without ARs. It's too difficult for the average hunter to age a deer without going by horns. There are also yearlings with big racks in some areas. but we digress.

 

From mission statement

This approach typically involves the protection of young bucks (yearlings and some 2.5 year-olds) combined with an adequate harvest of female deer to maintain a healthy population in balance with existing habitat conditions and landowner desires. This level of deer management involves the production of quality deer (bucks, does, and fawns), quality habitat, quality hunting experiences, and, most importantly, quality hunters.

Edited March 28, 2013 by Belo

[nyantler]

No antler, it just seems to be getting kind of stupid to be saying the same things over and over just trying to piss people off. I mean seriously, don't you ever get tired of just trolling to irritate people. It's one thing to say that stuff once if it is a truely held opinion, you might even be tempted to say it twice, but when you are into your 3rd or 4th year of mouthing the same old crap over and over again, it becomes obvious that it is moving from a statement of opinion into just plain hopes of irritating others to respond and feed your flame-war. My gosh doesn't that sort of thing ever get tiresome?

 

Anybody who has been here long enough remembers how Sits and I used to go at this subject in a very unfriendly fashion (to put it mildly). But even we eventually realized that nobody's mind was being changed and it was all becoming just a bunch of rancor with no purpose. I am wondering when the rest of you are going to arrive at the same conclusion......if ever. It all is said in the title of this thread. It is simply throwing gas on the fire in hopes that some name-calling and unfriendly exchanges will erupt (otherwise known as trolling). Maybe it's time to give it a rest.

Just like when my kids were young.. it takes a while before things you say start to sink in. Especially when a new guy comes in and starts spouting stupid crap that others start believing.

 

As for throwing gas on the fire.. I think that is why we all keep coming back for the same old debates... it's just too damn fun. You are as guitly as I am.

[phade]

Just like when my kids were young.. it takes a while before things you say start to sink in. Especially when a new guy comes in and starts spouting stupid crap that others start believing.

 

As for throwing gas on the fire.. I think that is why we all keep coming back for the same old debates... it's just too damn fun. You are as guitly as I am.

 

At least he's not the one promoting natural selection whilst acting as the laggard of the group.

[Five Seasons]

 Especially when a new guy comes in and starts spouting stupid crap that others start believing..

 

 

The ease of which you can shoot a crossbow does not change the way that it kills the animal.. and gives no more advantage than a compound has over a recurve or a longbow with its 80% let off.

 

 

If you believe the quote above is not "spouting stupid crap" yourself than I'm not sure we can debate. At least the majority of other crossbow guys will admit that it is indeed easier to hunt with a crossbow. How it "kills an animal" has never been a debate.

[Doc]

Just like when my kids were young.. it takes a while before things you say start to sink in. Especially when a new guy comes in and starts spouting stupid crap that others start believing.

 

As for throwing gas on the fire.. I think that is why we all keep coming back for the same old debates... it's just too damn fun. You are as guitly as I am.

Do you really think it is fun? I find it all a bit contrived and redundant, especially given the fact that there are so many new and truly interesting events going on in the world of guns, hunting, and other outdoor activities and issues. Of course, the skill of a troll involves how many people he can continue to draw into these rather unfriendly conflicts, and I do admit to occasionally being the victim of the trolls. They are so skilled at causing conflict and drawing others into it through inflamatory statements.

 

But I do find it interesting that you call it fun. I call it a pain in the butt to have to come back in to the same old crap trying to offset all the BS that people throw out just to keep conflict alive.

[Doc]

Kinda off subject and will not get into a pissin match with anyone but i believe this is the way of the world and one reason high fence hunts are a huge growing industry. I know for a fact that many places in Ny did not have enough bucks for the demand.  Have heard this all across the country.  People just want stuff fast and done now.  It is not a good thing for sure but i believe with land gettin ate up in houses or lease and public land with no deer the hunter numbers will keep falling!

If I was off-topic, it was not by mistake ..... lol.

 

And I believe you are right. diminishing participation most likely is not going to reverse for a whole list of reasons some are reasons of practicality, and some are cultural and social.

[WNYBuckHunter]

 I went back and looked. Here is your response to my statement below. I guess I'm a buffoon then. If you didn't mean it, you should be careful what you quote.

 

 

Sounds like a great organization if their officers bash their own study's and reports not to mention don't advocate ARs which they put right in their mission statement. Glad I turned down an offer to join.

 

First of all, heres what I quoted...

 

 

Where in that does it say ANYTHING ABOUT CROSSBOWS? Stop putting words in my mouth.

 

As far as the QDMA goes, theres nothing wrong with disagreeing with some things that an organization says or pointing out faults in things. As far as their support of Antler Restrictions goes, you obviously dont know where they stand on it. You also have no clue how I stand on the issue either. You are just assuming things.

 

BTW, I never bashed anything, I pointed out a flaw. Sorry bub, but I dont tend to fall in lock step to any organization and quote everything they say as gospel. If you enjoy being a follower, by all means, carry on. Im not like that.

 

I am an NRA member as well, but dont agree with everything they say either.

[WNYBuckHunter]

From mission statement

This approach typically involves the protection of young bucks (yearlings and some 2.5 year-olds) combined with an adequate harvest of female deer to maintain a healthy population in balance with existing habitat conditions and landowner desires. This level of deer management involves the production of quality deer (bucks, does, and fawns), quality habitat, quality hunting experiences, and, most importantly, quality hunters.

 

And where in the mission statement does it say anything about mandatory antler restrictions? Putting words in the QDMA's mouth now, are we?

[Culvercreek hunt club]

listen. I figured you'd respond to that post. But i believe your organization puts a lot of time, effort and money into that report and therefore touts it highly. Am I wrong? Do you not think it looks bad for an officer to publicly claim it as inaccurate? Whether it's true or not? I'm an advocate for the QDMA.

 

I guess I just don't see why this guy seems to nit pick at any report or fact that doesn't report his side. Referring to his own observations on number of trucks at state land as why he thinks numbers are declining. These kind of observations and statements are the type of things that would get you laughed out of the room at a board meeting at my company. You need data and statistics to support your argument. How do you know more people aren't hunting private land vs state land? How do you know people haven't been tagging out early and spending less time in the woods? How do you know hunting is up in some areas and down in others due to the economy or housing in the area? How do you know people aren't buying hunting camps in other areas and just "hunting elsewhere"? I've seen more pumpkins the last 2 years in the nice n' easy in Tully valley than I have in the past but I can't use this observation in my argument about increasing numbers. Don't forget upstate has been shrinking in population since the 1950's.

 

we had a very lengthy discussion on ARs a while back. Saying you do not support yearling buck harvest but dont support ARs is a bit of a stretch. I think you'll remember which side I'm on. I guess I don't see how you can ever enforce yearly protection without ARs. It's too difficult for the average hunter to age a deer without going by horns. There are also yearlings with big racks in some areas. but we digress.

 

From mission statement

This approach typically involves the protection of young bucks (yearlings and some 2.5 year-olds) combined with an adequate harvest of female deer to maintain a healthy population in balance with existing habitat conditions and landowner desires. This level of deer management involves the production of quality deer (bucks, does, and fawns), quality habitat, quality hunting experiences, and, most importantly, quality hunters.

I hunt 4 different areas of the sate and I can tell you just by the shots you hear there are fewer hunters out there. (unless everyone is becoming crack shots and that isn't what some threads on here claim...lol) The QDAM summit was held and WNY attended and he has a clear understanding of what THEY explained is actually represented in the report and how it was obtained. Hell I bet the DEC can't even tell us for sure how many of us stepped into the woods this past year.

 

As fas as me supporting letting yearlings wanlk and not supporting MANDATORY AR's, I don't think it is a stretch at all. I practice it and believe it need to happen through education and NOT another regulation. I don't get the quote of the mission statement, not sure what you are tryign to say but I can tell you as I stated above, QDMA does not support mandatory AR unless 3 conditions are met and they are not being met in NY, Hence they do not support it here.....as a MANDATORY REGULATION.  THe day they do is the day I leave.

 

[d-bone20917]

Keep going guys... you are almost to 22 pages.  You can do it!!!!

[Five Seasons]

First of all, heres what I quoted...

 

Where in that does it say ANYTHING ABOUT CROSSBOWS? Stop putting words in my mouth.

 

As far as the QDMA goes, theres nothing wrong with disagreeing with some things that an organization says or pointing out faults in things. As far as their support of Antler Restrictions goes, you obviously dont know where they stand on it. You also have no clue how I stand on the issue either. You are just assuming things.

 

BTW, I never bashed anything, I pointed out a flaw. Sorry bub, but I dont tend to fall in lock step to any organization and quote everything they say as gospel. If you enjoy being a follower, by all means, carry on. Im not like that.

 

I am an NRA member as well, but dont agree with everything they say either.

 

1. you selectively quote me. I reposted the actual statement without the part you deleted from my statement. I bolded it and made it red so you can see it easily. But whatever, moving on.

 

2. I agree that you do not have to follow the organization point for point. But again, I believe they put a lot of merit in their report. I asked if you or culver disagreed and you did not say you did. So again, I find it odd an officer would publicly call out the integrity of the report. I'm not saying you're statement of it being inflated is wrong. I just find it odd you admit it publicly. But hey, it doesn't bother you when someone calls out your organization right? How does it feel with the shoe on the other foot.

 

3. To yourself and culver. I never said they believe in ARs, I admited that. I just don't believe there is a successful way to implement yearling protection without them. I've heard the argument before on education. But then the same people think the rules are confusing enough. We have trouble enforcing the rules we have, we're worried about turning hunters away from hunting by not allowing xbows... but we're then going to try and convince them not to shoot a buck? How is that going to help youth get into the sport? The QDMA or any hunting organization is too small to educate the masses. without regs, there will be no protection.

 

http://www.qdma.com/articles/qdmas-position-on-mandatory-antler-restrictions

In general, QDMA prefers the voluntary passing of yearling bucks to mandatory antler regulations. However, we recognize that antler restrictions may be justified in some situations to achieve specific deer management objectives. Regarding our position on specific antler restriction proposals, QDMA examines each on a case-by-case basis and applies a three-part test.

 

I think this statement agrees with my position. While they're not advocating them to be mandatory, they realize in some cases it may be the only way to manage a heard successfully.

Edited March 28, 2013 by Belo

[mike rossi]

Just like when my kids were young.. it takes a while before things you say start to sink in. Especially when a new guy comes in and starts spouting stupid crap that others start believing.

 

As for throwing gas on the fire.. I think that is why we all keep coming back for the same old debates... it's just too damn fun. You are as guitly as I am.

About your statement: "Especially when a new guy comes in and starts spouting stupid crap that others start believing". 

 

But if the new guy happens to agree with someone's or some organization's agenda, then everything he says is dead on...

[Culvercreek hunt club]

 

3. To yourself and culver. I never said they believe in ARs, I admited that. I just don't believe there is a successful way to implement yearling protection without them. I've heard the argument before on education. But then the same people think the rules are confusing enough. We have trouble enforcing the rules we have, we're worried about turning hunters away from hunting by not allowing xbows... but we're then going to try and convince them not to shoot a buck? How is that going to help youth get into the sport? The QDMA or any hunting organization is too small to educate the masses. without regs, there will be no protection.

 

http://www.qdma.com/articles/qdmas-position-on-mandatory-antler-restrictions

In general, QDMA prefers the voluntary passing of yearling bucks to mandatory antler regulations. However, we recognize that antler restrictions may be justified in some situations to achieve specific deer management objectives. Regarding our position on specific antler restriction proposals, QDMA examines each on a case-by-case basis and applies a three-part test.

 

I think this statement agrees with my position. While they're not advocating them to be mandatory, they realize in some cases it may be the only way to manage a heard successfully.

Your Item 3 is in line with what I was saying, whether you see that or not. So with all these confusing laws you want to put another one on there? Mandatory AR's could have an impact of actually reducing hunter numbers. And even in Mandatory area the youth are exempt. I know private co ops that practice QDM that also give the youth a pass. It keeps them interested and that is as it should be. The numbers in the organization are not large here in NY but they are growing every year. We are behind other states in this process but without an effort to get the information out there it will never change. What effort have you made?

 

[WNYBuckHunter]

1. you selectively quote me. I reposted the actual statement without the part you deleted from my statement. I bolded it and made it red so you can see it easily. But whatever, moving on.

 

2. I agree that you do not have to follow the organization point for point. But again, I believe they put a lot of merit in their report. I asked if you or culver disagreed and you did not say you did. So again, I find it odd an officer would publicly call out the integrity of the report. I'm not saying you're statement of it being inflated is wrong. I just find it odd you admit it publicly. But hey, it doesn't bother you when someone calls out your organization right? How does it feel with the shoe on the other foot.

 

3. To yourself and culver. I never said they believe in ARs, I admited that. I just don't believe there is a successful way to implement yearling protection without them. I've heard the argument before on education. But then the same people think the rules are confusing enough. We have trouble enforcing the rules we have, we're worried about turning hunters away from hunting by not allowing xbows... but we're then going to try and convince them not to shoot a buck? How is that going to help youth get into the sport? The QDMA or any hunting organization is too small to educate the masses. without regs, there will be no protection.

 

http://www.qdma.com/articles/qdmas-position-on-mandatory-antler-restrictions

In general, QDMA prefers the voluntary passing of yearling bucks to mandatory antler regulations. However, we recognize that antler restrictions may be justified in some situations to achieve specific deer management objectives. Regarding our position on specific antler restriction proposals, QDMA examines each on a case-by-case basis and applies a three-part test.

 

I think this statement agrees with my position. While they're not advocating them to be mandatory, they realize in some cases it may be the only way to manage a heard successfully.

 

1. Yes I did, and made no bones about it. I left part of the statement in there that was wasnt referring to, so that part is my bad. Specifically I was referring to "Few Quit." which is just plain incorrect. I thought youd be able to figure that out, I dont think you are stupid, is that better?

 

2. It does not bother me that you called out the QDMA, it gave me a chance to correct you on it and spread the right information. Again, theres nothing wrong with disagreeing with things and pointing out what I see as a flaw with the data they presented. Im not worried about how much time someone spent on it, as far as I can see, its incorrect. Maybe future studies wont be dont that way, but I doubt my one opinion will have any bearing on it at all. What was it that you asked culver and I that hasnt been responded to? I seem to have missed it.

 

3. Culver covered that well enough.

[mike rossi]

I'm not sure I follow your point. It sounds like you're stating these organization are not interested in conservation?

 

Correct, they don't like turtles....

 

Stake holder participation, particularly through the county federations and the NYSCC holds to the ideology of those on the top of the heap. Those people have not put conservation first and don't really even understand conservation. Many are old and set in their ways and wont benefit from anything which takes a moderate or long time to produce results, one example being habitat management. Since it wont benefit them- they fight against it and for nepotistic legislation. The younger leaders and member constituency have historically been sheep, that is followers, not critical thinkers or leaders.

 

The Outdoor Writers Association- there is the national OWA and the NYOWA and these organizations act like an electrical circuit with a regulator. They regulate what information or messages they want to reach the sporting community. That is how they achieve consensus at the club or county federation level. Once they have that consensus, they can move forward with recommendations to the legislature which they claim are "wise" and  backed by thousands of voting sportsmen who make up their member constituency.

[phade]

I now feel like I'm in a Tom Cruise movie about conspiracy theory....sheesh.

 

Sounds like someone with problems with authority all the way around.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Is Tom Cruise still around?...lol

[growalot]

I said,no I didn't...I'm right ,your wrong...your right, I'm wrong...... yes you did, no I didn't ...yes I did ,You did not....Your a fool...no your a fool...quote this , quote that ...Quote quote, quote...Counter quote ,quote,quote...Bla bla bla

 

NYS get off your ass and settle this already!!!

[LIHUNT]

22 pages of basically re quotes, re quotes, and wait for it......re quotes again

 

[WNYBuckHunter]

I now feel like I'm in a Tom Cruise movie about conspiracy theory....sheesh.

 

Sounds like someone with problems with authority all the way around.

 

Just in case this is directed at me...

 

Because I dont fall in lock step with everything an organization has to say? It has nothing to do with any conspiracy theory, I simply dont agree with the way the numbers were complied, thats all. It has nothing to do with a problem with authority, these organizations are not authority figures anyway.

 

Its like anything else in life, take my friends for instance. I dont have to agree with every opinion they have to be friends with them. Hell I dont agree with everything my fiance has an opinion on.