[David Petersen]

in reply to: Sloooow Start, but Great Evening #59381

No more roof shoveling for this old fart. A few years ago we put on a steeper roof, with a loft bedroom as a bonus. 😀 Now I have to climb the much steeper roof to clean the stovepipe. But not that often, and not when it’s covered with snow.

[David Petersen]

in reply to: Sloooow Start, but Great Evening #59255

Ahh, it’s payback time again. All you “eastern” guys (and just about everything except CA is east from here) have to put up with us westerners carrying on happily about our September hunting adventures … and now here we cowboys sit (except those who can afford to travel to hunt), reduced to hunting via your daily stories, as our seasons are mostly done. And no complaints, as I don’t function well as an archer in deep cold. David, in the early years here, we regularly supplemented my unreliable hunted and fished meat with road-killed elk and deer. I learned all the tricks to make it as good as it can be, and my dogs, not the least picky about a bit of blood and guts in their meat, always grew fat and sassy. I hate waste in general and wasted life specifically. So never apologize for that. I know one friend who lived for years on roadkill while learning the basic of rifle hunting … and another lifelong rifle hunter (his family owned Marlin until a few years ago) who grew tired of killing so became a trophy-class roadkill hunter and his family of four never goes without fresh wild meat, esp. in winter. “Meat’s meat,” said the mountain men. Well, yes and no, depending on how long we’ve been without. Best luck to all you cold-toed heroes.

[David Petersen]

in reply to: Something to get your blood pumping.. #57132

Wowza! Just perfect!

[David Petersen]

in reply to: Western PA shoot #57045

Two guys with hair, one with a hat … in time, all three will be hatted. Looks like good shooting and good fun. Unless I worked up to it, 60 arrows at one go would likely put me out of business for a while. Brennan, I like your “Year Long Day” quote. Darn, I read that book five times already in the year since Mike sent it to me … and now, thanks to your reminder, and with the longs nights of winter here and my dogs not very conversational, a sixth read seems in order. That’s a nice looking roving range you have there.

[David Petersen]

in reply to: Quiet my quiver! #53652

“Quiet my quiver.” Reminds me of “Shiver me timbers!” 😀

[David Petersen]

in reply to: Turn for the better #53647

Bravo, amigo! Tyrone would be proud! But of course, he don’t rate no free meat! 😛

[David Petersen]

in reply to: Kayak hunt fail.. #53645

Great pics, Jim. Looks like a lovely trip even if you didn’t get to eat goat. But hey, I thought “fail” was an internet term restricted to barely-clad young women doing stupid stuff on cam after too many beers on a hot day? This seems much more a classic is SNAFU, to use the standard military acronym.

[David Petersen]

in reply to: A.M or P.M. ground blind or still hunting #50397

Bum– I admire your spunk. But do you absolutely need a tree stand to have a chance of making meat? Thing is, while early and late definitely align with the most deer movement, they are out there all the time and the single most important aspect of hunting success I have found is “putting in the hours.” If you can be more comfy in a ground blind and put in more hours, that’s the way I’d go. Certainly, you won’t have much luck sitting in the open in a lawn chair at noon. But my point is, given your med situation, you might consider hunting longer from a more comfy situation, rather than choosing a short time frame. Or maybe not. It’s just another alternative to consider. Healing is most important, and not putting that at risk.

[David Petersen]

in reply to: New Elkheart #48176

Mike, my drill instructors called it “lean and mean.”

[David Petersen]

in reply to: Garbaging for Bears #48174

J. — As I’ve stated before, some years ago here in CO, banning baiting and hounding of bears won by more than a 2/3 majority, the biggest in state history, and there was no real involvement by “antihunters” (who for many, seem to be defined as anyone who is against anything anyone might want to do and call it hunting). I have never been scared by the big bag antis, because I’ve had no reason to be. But I’m scared to death of what is happening to hunting, as it negatively impacts me personally. I grant it’s different in different regions. But the antis can’t shoot us unless we give them the ammo, as the majority nonhunting public is neutral. And that’s the core issue surrounding all fringe activities around hunting: do we want to persist and lose support, or give a bit and gain from it? Of course, when some 2/3 of Americans don’t give a hoot about the world they live in–don’t apparently care about anything, not just hunting–enough even to vote, then anything can and does happen and the rest of us are washed downstream with that dumb (in both meanings of the term)nonpartyicipating majority. If we don’t vote, we don’t count. I am glad I am old.

[David Petersen]

in reply to: Garbaging for Bears #47969

Arguing against baiting with those who do it, is like arguing against religion with the religious. In both cases the critics are disadvantaged by the politics of politeness. That is, while the religious person or baiter can argue their points endlessly–based on scripture or wildlife management etc.–without seeming to insult anyone else personally, to argue against a belief or activity always is interpreted as a personal attack. Logically, it’s an unfair system of discourse. How to separate criticism of an activity or belief from personal criticism of the people involved? Like others here have said, I believe “baiting is not hunting” is as close as we can get. And even there, there are exceptions. One gentleman who posts here (but not so far on this thread) has in past baited bears. He did so because he and his family are making a serious effort to live as independently as possible from the “industrial food grid.” They hunt, fish, garden and raise small livestock. When he was baiting bears it was for food, pure and simple. He did not boast about it here or anywhere and rarely spoke of it in private; he didn’t even consider it hunting. Rather, it’s like when circumstances have forced me the past two years to take a rifle out in early winter to get elk meat I was unable to get during bow season (weather, human interference, medical problems and surgery, etc.) … I don’t consider that hunting, certainly nothing to boast about, but simply shopping in the woods the most efficient way possible: utility, not sport. So–and here I’m risking unintended criticism of individuals but it’s a valid part of a fair and open discussion–the more a person boasts about killing bears over bait, esp. if that person spends a lot of money to travel and hires a professional baiter, the more I have to shake my head. So here again, as so often in hunting and life, the morality of what we do is shaped in large part by how we view and speak of the “accomplishment.” We can nitpick the debate to pieces with analogy, but baiting (yes, we’re talking food or food scents) of bears is not hunting. It’s not necessarily immoral, either … depending on why we do it and how we think and talk about it. I do know that the general nonhunting majority detests it, and the majority in the end will decide the fate of hunting.

[David Petersen]

in reply to: Ausjim #46738

Jim, after going through all the enlisted training and serving actively as long as you have, I predict you will find officer’s school a piece of cake. One of these days, I predict, you’ll outrank ColMike. Right now the only one who does that is his wife. 😉

Go get ’em.

[David Petersen]

in reply to: New Elkheart #45951

Nice hat, Mike, but I think you look better in a combat helmet. 😛

It appears from the flying arrow photo that you need to get stiffer arrows that don’t bend around so much. 😆 I also admire your choice of pink feathers. 😉

Seriously, you are a man of good taste in bows, if not in hats. You and Patrick have those qualities in common.

OK, enuf of kicking the Colonel. Darn nice bow, brother.

[David Petersen]

in reply to: My recent experience #42218

Experimenting with arrow setups is always fun. But I see one potential weak spot in what you describe. For hunting, rather than using a light broadhead and beefing up the tip weight with hardware, you’d do better to invest as much of the front weight as possible in the broadhead. The specific reason is that the heavier the head (assuming a more or less standard sized two-blades), the thicker the steel. Thus less likelihood of bending or breaking on impact. Putting a light thin broadhead in front of 650 grains of arrow is asking a lot of that head when it hits heavy bone. I have had good luck where it counts–good penetration on big animals, generally pass-throughs even with bone hits–by starting with heavy, very sturdy broadhead and building the arrow to match the head, rather than building a strong arrow and fronting it with a light head. I agree with your take on carbon vs. wood for EFOC setups, and I share your reluctance. But using an arrow system that won’t self-destruct on impact with bone is our basic duty to the animals we hunt. And it also leads to much higher kill and recovery rates. Best luck.

[David Petersen]

in reply to: Garbaging for Bears #41151

Maine and CO are different states with different situations. Yet the issues and justification and fears you quote are so remarkable similar, consider please these well documented statistic facts (as opposed to hearsay and speculation):

Since Colorado banned baiting and hounding bears by ballot initiative in 1992, the annual number of bear hunters has risen, the annual number of bears killed by hunters has risen, and the annual average size of checked bears has increased amazingly … all of these gains gradually rising on a fairly steady upward curve across the years. Back then, also, the fans of the status quo, largely baiting outfitters and their clients, plus of course the predator-phobic agriculture community, and claimed the ballot initiative was the work of HSUS, but they didn’t come in until the last minute, after they saw it was going to win and wanted to grab credit. The movement was in fact started and overwhelming driven by concerned hunters including me, concerned nonhunters (not antihunters) and a few valiant Div. of Wildlife biologists and wildlife managers who had given up trying to use the system for change, since the system is political and ag-driven, ignoring rather than upholding establish research science. Everyone, including Tom Beck the leading black bear biologist in the West at the time and a dedicated bowhunter (see his “A Failure of the Spirit, p 200, in A Hunter’s Heart), finally, after years of effort, gave up attempting to convince the CO Wildlife Commission (political appointees, not professional wildlife managers, and always heavy on ranchers) to end baiting and hounding. Aside from being considered grossly unethical by many hunters and a 2/3 majority of the nonhunting public and thus shining a dirty light on all hunting (agreed to by P&Y and B&C) garbaging for bears and executing treed bears strongly favored selectively killing large males and consequently had driven the size of the average checked bear down to embarrassingly and biologically unsupportably low levels. In the end, hunters who had never hunted bear during the days of hounding and baiting took up the sport after the ban, explaining it was no longer a dishonorable activity. But I’ve said this all before, for example see “‘Brain-dead Political Hacks and other Friends of Wildlife’: Black Bear Management in Colorado,” p. 181 in Ghost Grizzlies.

[Author]

Posts