Recent Posts

I had actually begun to switch to COC, specifically Muzzy Phantoms, a few years ago, and killed my last deer using a Phantom before a physical setback that took me out of the woods for serious hunting for a couple years.

This year, though, I am back up to shooting at 56# with the Mathews, and discovered a package of unused NAP Thunderheads in 125 grains in an old tackle box in the garage. I had been experimenting with heavier heads and lighter shafts while shooting field points, and the discovery of the TH's gave me the opportunity to try the heavier broadheads with the lighter shafts. I liked the results, and decided to return to the TH's this year. I had always liked their performance and durability, before switching to Muzzy years ago, and have complete confidence in them. Also have a good supply on hand, since I also had three other bodies and a BUNCH of slightly used blades suitable for resharpening and reuse.

Spend no dime before it's time.

Shooting nice groups out to 40 yards with them, reliably. Very happy with prior experience with them. Looking forward to getting a couple of them bloody this year.

This issue is an important one for the public to consider.

Does the land actually belong to the federal government, or is the federal government just responsible for the management of the property?

Does "management" of properties mean controlling access by the owners, or just limiting the activities permitted thereon?

And in the absence of personnel to do active management, should the default option be the complete closure of the public property, or simply the cessation of management efforts that require their presence? A gate left open seems to me require even less tending by federal employees than one locked closed.

If the answers to these questions come out one way when considering National Wildlife Refuges, and a different way when considering National Forests, why?

And how does the principle apply to US Highways, Interstates, Railroads, etc.,.....even schools,banks, and hospitals that operate under considerable federal regulation?

Has King Barrack I actually gained the total control he seeks?

Is it time to dump his tea in the harbor? Is it already too late to attempt to correct our course by voting and educating?

We seem to be rapidly approaching the "interesting times" of the old Chinese curse.

Good story, Jon.

I never encountered quite such a situation, but did step in a couple times in a less dramatic manner, and put myself in a couple of situations where things could have gotten newsworthy very shortly while protecting an innocent from harm. Much younger and sprier then.... and probably overconfident in my abilities.

But realistically, now, I should be looking into a stun gun and a belt holster for some of the intermediate protection that once could have been provided by fists or grappling (did some wrestling in HS, but even then wasn't good enough to make the varsity, and that was fifty plus years ago).

Maybe when I give up and get a smart phone to replace the Ol' Reliable dumb one in my pocket that just makes and receives calls, I should get an app that would stream video directly to my home computer or some remote location as well, so I could still hobble towards the action if need be, brandishing the threat of prosecution or electrical stimulation, instead of just the choice between slow pursuit and ineffective punches or 110 grain JHP's.

As for socks, I do have a couple pair of black ones that I use for the more formal weddings and funerals, when the black shoes and one of my two ties is called for, but my favorite ones with my sneakers are some really thick camo ones I found last fall at Rural King. Think Bush 41, but less garish, although probably in the same fashion category, generally speaking. 8^)

I see it as more like the overpopulation problem or the battle of the bulge that so many of us fight personally. It's something that needs to be changed through a change in attitude and lifestyle, rather than a quick fix.

Certainly eliminating the truly senseless spending should be done immediately.

Canada has finally stopped the minting of pennies. The US continues to manufacture them at a cost of around three cents each. And nickles at a cost of about eight cents apiece, that they admit to. I suspect the books don't reflect the entire cost in either case, but the costs that the government admits to amount something over a billion dollars a year, above the face value of the coins, to give us all the privilege and pleasure of carrying them around in our pockets.

Most of us don't bother to use them in making purchases anymore. The kids aren't taught how to make change with them now, they just are taught which key to touch on the electronic cash register to make the correct change pop up onscreen. And that's only if they are making cash purchases and not swiping a card.

And the government excuse for their continued waste of taxpayer dollars to support the zinc lobby and the mints? They say the coins are extremely popular with the public, based on their surveys that show they are the currency "most handled by the public"! Guess they didn't bother to ask whether the public WANTED to be handling the small change or whether it was just another government nuisance.

Dad was born in 1921, and in his youth, the penny was the smallest currency unit in use. Prices now are about thirty times as high as they were then, and the penny is still in use. We could drop all coinage except the quarter, make them about the size of dimes, and still have the lowest coin be a little less in value than the penny was when Dad was actually glad to handle one.

That would only save one billion or two a year, but it would be a start.

Kinda like deciding having a basketball team of kids is more responsible than going for a football team, or giving up the supersize Frosty and the triple-decker half-pounder, in favor of a medium Frosty and a double-decker, and maybe skipping the fries.

It's a big ship we want to start in the opposite direction, and we will realistically have to make some effort to turn it a degree or two from it's current course. But the iceberg isn't all that far away, and we'd better get started.

And as far as the current occupant of the White House is concerned....I'm not real thrilled with him either, but he didn't invent liberalism and fiscal irresponsibility, he's just a current salesman of it. And judging from Woody's post above, he'll sell anything he thinks the public will buy.

I remember thinking "Uh-oh, we're in trouble now!" back in the fall of 1960, when a young senator from MA was running hard for the office, and in a speech from a balcony at a college in the east, in a scene that looked something like a papal address from the balcony of the Vatican, he told the audience that we didn't need to worry about the national debt, because "....we only owe it to ourselves!". The crowd roared its approval.

The underlying problem isn't the salesmen who push the "answer" to our problems by promising "more money, faster horses, and younger women", it's in the gullibility of the customer base that supports the success of the technique. Changing our course won't be easy or fast, but I do agree completely that it is necessary.

The more optimistic view of the future is that as more people of all ages are getting more of their news and information from media such as this and less from the mass media and the public schools, we seem to be seeing an increase in people who value individual freedom and personal responsibility. If that trend continues, we may have some effect on the helm pretty soon. The sales resistance to the liberal messages seems to be growing.

timex, I didn't intend to say that leasing was evil or the basis of the problem. I have a mixed opinion of the practice overall. Even sought a lease on a small parcel or two in recent years, but couldn't close the deal in either case.

I saw many properties being closed to hunting even before leasing became more popular. Urban sprawl, increasing population, and the increasing number of landowners in the generation that grew up learning about wildlife by watching Disney and Animal Planet all have an effect as well.

And I do agree completely with you on the deer often being blamed for crop losses that were caused by other critters. I've sat along a cornfield edge and watched a constant parade of ground squirrels climbing the stalks and slipping inside the shucks until nothing was visible except the twitching end of the tail as they filled their cheeks and then scampered back to their burrows with another load of kernels. The railroad embankment that ran near that field edge was honeycombed with burrows and the occupants were all stocking up for the winter from the first couple rows. I did also see a deer come along and she also sampled a little from one stalk as she passed.

I happened to think about the evidence that was left behind. First couple rows of corn pretty much decimated, deer tracks in the soft ground, no remaining sign of any other culprit. Therefore, "deer damage" in the eyes of the farmer.

Though about that again when I was floating the river for ducks one season and saw the slides and debris mounds of beaver at regular intervals, almost all of them containing a good number of cornstalks. That's in addition to the coons you mentioned, and the fox squirrels that I've watched hit the corn on a regular basis, often carrying off entire ears with them.

No doubt the deer are responsible for a good portion of the damage, probably most of it, but in many areas I suspect that maybe close to half of what they are blamed for is actually done by other critters.

But back to the leasing....I was just trying to make the point that at least SOME leases are closed to other hunters who would be glad to help with the excess doe problem that the lessees find to be more of a chore than an enjoyable opportunity. I suppose it's natural that the guys leasing who are concentrating on antlers and just can't understand the meat hunter, might not trust him to pass up the nice buck if it happens to stroll past them, and of course they wouldn't want their doe reductions being handled by others while they are still pursuing the bucks that are chasing those does. So in that way, the hunters who would be glad to help are still being screened out, with good reason and not malice. I'd probably manage the same way most of the time if it were my lease.

It's good that the ground is at least being hunted, rather than simply posted against any legal use and saved for the trespassers who don't give a hoot about the no hunting or trespassing signs. And it's probably good for hunting in general that the landowners are realizing a cash benefit from hunting.

But balanced against those benefits is the further reductions in land available to the hunter of less means or the more casual hunter who used to find permission easier to gain by knocking on doors.

Like most areas in life, there's more than one side to the question.

I was only trying to point out the need for better communications between the factions involved to better take advantage of those situations where all concerned could come out ahead with some cooperation.

Jon, I also enjoyed many of the fully doctored-up drinks that had some coffee in them that became available in gas stations everywhere in the last twenty years or so, but for my regular morning coffee with breakfast, I prefer black and "full-flavored" myself.

Best I've run into so far is the Folgers' Gourmet Black Silk in the K-cups using the Keurig coffeemaker the kids got us a few years ago. I like a twelve ounce coffee, and that blend has enough strength to still be very good IMO even when diluted to fill the larger mug. My tiny daughter-in-law is the sweetest and quietest person I've ever known, but she likes the same coffee, only she drinks it in an eight-ounce cup, makig it about half again the strength of mine....says that strength is the best she's found! Kinda like finding John Wayne liked a mild white clover tea, only different! 8^)

duff, I haven't been in there in a few years, just driven past (since I bought my Jeep, my need for frequent replacement parts has dropped off). But a couple guys I shoot with know a couple of the leads and they say they are pretty much in character all the time 8^).

Good advice. I had tried to quit several times over the years and failed, until I finally took it a half-day at a time for a few weeks, then a day at a time, etc., and resuming smoking when each period of withdrawal was up, to gradually weaken the habit's hold on me and build up more resistance while knowing the cessation was only temporary. Took about three months of sticking to the increasingly longer "no-smoking today" intervals until I finally had the nerve to face the "no-smoking....ever again" step for the last time, but that time it stuck.

Had the residual cravings too, that gradually diminished with time. Worst two times for me were following a good meal, and hopping in the car and leaving for work. But it's a habit, not a true physical need, and we CAN beat it if we stick to our guns. It's been about fifteen years now, and I can honestly say my last short craving was a mild one about five years ago. I only remember it because it was rare enough by then that it surprised me.

Congratulations on staying off them, you're past the worst of it now. Just don't backslide when the temptations hit, and you'll be increasingly glad of your decision.

LOL! Yes, I know that name, but he wasn't the writer I had in mind. The fella I was thinking of I believe briefly went to the Indianapolis Star or maybe it was the Bloomington Times-Herald as their outdoor columnist. Last name started with a "B"....Butler, maybe?

Sounds like some scammer is mining for familiar names in contact lists of people with our lifestyles.

Hey, it finally came to me as I typed this...Brandon Butler!

I feel sure his involvement was limited to his name being used by the scammer, as was the case in this more recent incident.