DoubleDose

I love these publications. To call this a "study" is a stretch; it is more a case(s) report. IMO, these are the key takeaways: ...the authors suggest "a possible novel animal-to-human transmission of CWD." The authors of the April 9 study are quick to point out that causation for the recent CJD cases in hunters remains unproven. Surveillance and further research are essential to better understand this possible association. Here's another hypothesis. It's just as possible the prions are in the soil, being uptaked by the plants, and the plants being consumed by humans and deer.

I'm sure to be made illegal in NYS soon!

DEC on Long Island has actually done this on State land,and caught some of the criminals (it is a crime).

I believe it/him/them. Wife's friend said she saw one in the Poconos one early morning walking through her backyard. Her husband told her she saw a large Bobat. Months later they were at a fair and PA DEC had a display of native animals including a Bobcat and Cougar. She walked up to the Cougar pointed at it and said this is what I saw not that (pointing at the Bobcat). Two ranchers out west (SD/MT) both independently have commented to me that a Cougar does not want to be seen and you will not see it.

Yes, just because something can be done, does not mean it should be done.

In DEC defense, they did restore turkey to Long Island and there is now a hunting season for them. Sadly, that is the only example I am aware of.

This is all because of greedy politicians. Property taxes should not be based on market value. It should all be based on physical attributes. Such as, acreage/square footage of property x $A, square footage of dwelling x $B, square footage of shed/garage/barn x $C. Doing it this way there is no question or need to grieve. Basing property taxes on market value is a disincentive for anyone to improve their property, further making NYS undesirable to live. I would love to see a class action lawsuit against NYS regarding this. Heck, if NYS can sue and win against DJT for his property evaluations, then what's good for the goose is good for the gander!

Here's some NYS liberal/Hochul logic. Friend owns a restaurant that serves alcohol and has a "business" pistol carry permit. Went to get an upgrade to "full carry" and was told he would no longer be able to carry in HIS restaurant because it serves alcohol.

The bolded is so true. I remember ranges that had no heat in the winter, ranges where the ventilation system had the targets blowing in the wind, ranges where the ventilation system was so poor the range filled with smoke, and ranges so poorly sound deadened the scoring room sounded like you were on the firing line.

It's only as fun as the guys you are shooting with and against. I used to compete in this years ago. Some teams you really enjoyed shooting against even when you where going to lose and some teams were a real headache trying to steal a win.

"The alligator has numerous health-related issues, including blindness in both eyes and spinal complications," said the department, adding that it was estimated to be around 30 years old. Based on this statement, I would not be surprised that they euthanize it to further their narrative that this was in everyone's, including the alligator's, best interests.

Here's my 2 cent regarding your goal to "improve your marksmanship". Take the money you would spend on a new "bench" rifle and Leupold scope, and buy a NEW Leupold scope with CDS dial for your current hunting .308 rifle; which is already very capable to 3oo yards. Zero the gun for 200 yards. Then spend the additional money on accurizing your current hunting rifle; bed action, free float barrel, tune trigger, test various premium ammo if you do not handload. Like the old sayings go, beware the man with one gun, he knows how to use it and Beware the man who uses only one gun platform because he probably knows how to use it much better than the guy who rotates between different

I agree with your second point but unfortunately the folks this is directed at don't care about their or YOUR well being. It is a very basic safety course like "rules of the road." We can thank all the folks with more money than brains who just buy a motor boat or jetski and then let their KIDS do whatever they want, when and where ever they want with it.

"William Franklin Stamey Jr., who had a previous poaching conviction and obviously did not learn from his poor choice, received a felony conviction for his latest misdeeds, which cost him $12,500 in restitution, along with fines and court costs. " This means he can no longer possess firearms; an additional deserved punishment IMO.

Agree but will add all with consideration of what these will be during hunting season!

For me it changes nothing and feels no different. Jose said it best: One does not hunt in order to kill; on the contrary, one kills in order to have hunted...If one were to present the sportsman with the death of the animal as a gift he would refuse it. What he is after is having to win it, to conquer the surly brute through his own effort and skill with all the extras that this carries with it: the immersion in the countryside, the healthfulness of the exercise, the distraction from his job. Jose Ortega y Gasset, Meditations on Hunting Spanish philosopher & politician (1883 - 1955)

I'll add a different perspective. DEC biologists/foresters set a harvest goal for each DMU; that I am not sure is met. Provided it is legal, done legally, and the meat is not wasted, I have no problem with the number of big game animals a hunter chooses to take.

I think this is more a function of the overall health of the individual deer; nutrition, stress, weather, etc.

Agree; and there is another interesting point in the video. The scenario is that you wounded a deer and could not find it. You "believe" it is dead and this is a carcass recovery; but you do not know it is dead. Therefore it is hunting/tracking/pursuing a wounded animal which falls under the definition of "hunting". In the eyes of the law, to be a carcass recovery, you need to know it is dead, which means you've already found it and made that determination.

IMO, "every scum bag" (your words) doesn't care what the laws are and will already use them to scout deer. They will just say they are using it for something else, like bird watching or night wildlife photography.

Curious to know, how & with what do you dispatch the animal?

...cause they should have recognized you were from New Yawk by your accent

I am not an expert in wildlife biology studies. When it comes to studies like this, there is a quality aspect; how many deer? how long studied? Controlling or adjusting for variables or differences (weather, food, predation, survival, etc) over time. Typically, it is accepted that you need at least two well done studies sufficiently powered (large enough to rule out chance) to prove something (as cause and effect). If the studies are not well done, of sufficient quality, and powered they are of no value.

From a purely scientific perspective with something as complicated as this, a single study is insufficient, even if it was a well done study, to be proof. Results need to be replicated in another study or studies to be proof.

In response to the OPs original specific question, I would guess that the deer biologists have determined that in those WMUs the 1.5 year old bucks are growing brow tines (plus 2) and being culled, hence a need for change from other areas. The goal for antler restrictions was to get bucks past the 1.5 year age. That is the only explanation i could think of that would make sense.