A HORSE STORY or JUST HORSING AROUND???

So, I am coming back from a "trout town USA " dinner Saturday night, and as always I am on the back roads and always looking for a photo-op.

I figured I could get some nice shots along the Willowemoc as dusk was approaching.  As I came around a turn on Hazel Rd I spied two horses in a fenced pasture and they were on the far end!

Well, as soon as they saw me exit the car with camera in hand I could see a twinkle in their eyes and I knew they were in a mischievous mood. They looked at each other and then sauntered quickly in my direction.  Now, by no means am I a horseman, but as a "ute" I was around horses many times, as my sister rode frequently and eventually worked on a horse farm, a place called "Borderland Farms" (Sussex, NJ) as a teenager.  I am comfortable around them, but I have to admit that I am intimidated by their size.  I could see that they were up to no good.  I felt like I was about to be pick-pocketed.

I realized that the possibility that they could smell the "rib sauce" from my recent dinner on my hands may have been an attractor, but these two just had "trouble" written all over their faces.  I greeted them with soft friendly words as they lifted their heads over the corral fencing to get a better look at me.  They seemed friendly enough as I patted their foreheads.  I saw this as a great photo opportunity and tried to position myself with my back to them to set up the picture.  I was laughing as I did this and one of them pushed my shoulder with its nose putting me off balance, (a little) but still laughing (almost knocked the pick out of my mouth)!

I was actually giddy at this point and tried to center myself between these two characters holding out the camera trying to get all three of us in the picture.  As i did this, the blonde haired hussy on the left grabbed the back of my arm with her mouth giving me quite a pinch.  Still laughing, but now alert, I chortled some foul language in her direction and backed away.  I knew i had been used and abused by these equine comedians!  So I said to the one on the right "Whats with the long face?"

Eh, I guess you had to be there!

PS - I have subsequently learned that this dynamic duo's names are Horace and Jaspar  --- NO Just kidding!

Thats Rusty and Jeri.

Never look a gift horse in the mouth!

Never kick a gift horse in the mouth!

Never stick your arm in a gift horses mouth!

WORDS to live bye!

MR. NELSON, "TEAR DOWN THAT WALL!"

I read Dick Nelson's column the other day.  His diatribe on crossbows and the pathetic stance of the "New York Bowhunters" was reading just fine until he mixed in his usual nonsense about antler restrictions.  See, Dick is still mired down in the rhetoric that surrounds antler restrictions.  To most opponents, antler restrictions equate to trophy hunting.  They all  spout the same crap, "ya can't eat horns" or "I have to feed my family" or the classic "its about personal freedom".  I am sick of it!  This is retardation at it's best!

These rationalizations, and that is EXACTLY what they are, draw a direct correlation to what is wrong with "sportsmen" today and why our tradition is dieing.  SELFISHNESS!  To posture one of these excuses is downright selfish and contentious, to say the least.  Thank God, that Dick Nelson and his ilk are the minority in this debate because otherwise, all hope for the resurrection of our tradition could be lost!  

Now, selfish is a strong word, but that is exactly what comes to mind first, every time I hear some "expert" using the "personal freedom" mantra.   It resonates ME ME ME!  Sportsmen, are supposed to represent what is great about our tradition.  They are supposed to embrace their role as a deer management tool while enjoying all that nature has to offer!   In this case, the quarry and its healthy proliferation are supposed to be what is important to deer managers and hunters alike.  When that importance is not evident, well, then it becomes all too easy for the antis to paint our picture with broad strokes using depictions and words like "bambi-killers", "blood-thirsty" and even "murderers".  We are tools of deer management, borne from primordial needs, but we are supposed to have consciences too!  We are supposed to respect our quarry and nurture their healthy management. Gone are the days when men (in general) had to go afield to feed their families.  Rarely, is it a necessity in America for men and women to take weapon in hand for the express purpose of putting food on their table.  Those days are over! 

I believe that to negatively connote and disparage, those of us that realize that antler restrictions can help insure a healthier herd is myopic; and to a degree slanderous.  If nothing else, it is an attempt to shed poor light on the people who truly understand the positive effect that yearling buck protection can play on the animal; in conjunction with the herd health and hunting tradition.

Mr. Nelson really manifests his ignorance on antler restrictions when he postures and panders his negative rhetoric:

"If proponents of this restriction are so obsessed with shooting older deer, why don’t they hunt in those units. Unless, of course, they don’t want to stray too far off the road.

One has to wonder, does he really believe this crap and just what is he trying to infer?

Does he really believe that better deer management plays into the anti-hunter's agenda?  

Mr. Nelson needs to wake up and realize that his perspective on deer management is part of the negative equation, as to how and why, our hunting tradition is sinking into an abyss.  Our generation has FAILED to stimulate regeneration, because men like himself have become enamored by mediocrity.  They choose to remember bygone days as the 'good old days' instead of understanding the reality of our failure to improve hunting conditions (habitat, access and the nurturing of the specie) as they will relate to the future!

Mr. Nelson's column can be read at:  http://www.registerstar.com/articles/2010/05/27/columnists/outdoors/doc4bfdf99d4b903273176495.txt

WAS I RIGHT OR WAS I WRONG?

I was wrong!  It took me a few years to figure it out, but my usually optimistic perspective was wrong.   For several years I have been telling many of you that Dr. Gary Alt and the Pennsylvania Game Commission had made a huge mistake by forcing antler restrictions down the throats of Pennsylvania's residents.  I have gone on record as saying that the NYS DEC was going about it in a better way.  That gradual implementation would be advantageous for New York hunters as they would be less resentful to having a different scheme suddenly enacted.  I have said, 'that easing into a new strategy would be received more easily by those against, and understood by those for, who understand their necessity for implementation in the Southern Zone'.  One problem to that theory, I did not count on the hierarchy of the DEC turning into spineless jellyfish and turning deer management in New York into a futile action.  The DEC did not have the foresight to further implement the plan on the basis of science.  In fact, their refusal to see the importance to the herd and deer hunting was myopic!  

Gary Alt was right; in matters of science, hunters opinions should not have any bearing!   

See, Gary Alt had a plan, a real deer management plan, to solve a real management problem.  He had a huge unhealthy deer population whose sex ratio had grown way beyond the norm.  As a true man of science, he realized that the herd health was in jeopardy and that delaying the implementation of a remedy could have serious consequences.  He saw the problem for what it was, "biology related".  He did not account for the initial public relations nightmare that was festering, but then again, he did not have too because he was sure of his course of action and he set the plan in motion.  Even when the Pennsylvania "sportsmen" mocked and threatened him, he knew that his plan was sound and logical.  He dealt with the reality of the situation; regardless of the upheaval in the sporting community.  He was absolutely correct in his assessment that the herd was more important than the lambasting that he (personally) was getting from the court of uneducated public opinion.  Science should rule when it comes to the well-being of the specie!   Science should rule on behalf of the specie even while biologists debate the necessity of the action!  At the very least, science tells us that age diversity in the herd is important to functioning NORMALLY!   

Dr. Alt is a true hero of deer conservation in my opinion, as he put herd health above the protean whims of the uneducated sportsman!

Now, many will sneer and be quick to point out that WE don't have the over-population problem that Pennsylvania had!  Well, that is only partially true.  In sheer volumetric numbers that is true, but there are regions of this state that you can't find a deer and there are regions of this state where the sex ratio is way beyond the high-side (5:1 ratio) of norm, that is accepted by most biologists.  Many biologists believe that the 5:1 ratio is impossible to exceed, but prior to the Pennsylvania implementation of the antler restrictions, the western study area (WSA) was documented at 9.8 does to 1 male deer and the eastern study area (ESA) 6.2 does to 1 male deer. (Behavioral Ecology Advance Access - "Dispersal" - published online on August 4, 2008 -- by Oxford University Press)  Those numbers represent a reality that prevails in regions of the northeast, including large tracts in New York's Southern Zone.  The facts remain, that the DEC has failed to address these problem areas and has failed miserably when accounting for deer herd populations.  The use of the Citizen Task Forces to count and relay deer numbers is just not reliable.  Groups that meet every 5, 10 or 14 years (as is the case in WMU 3H) can not possibly account for the fluctuation of deer densities that occur annually.

The DEC touts a 2.3:1 (DTB Ratio) in the southeast region of New York State.  Believe me, that if that number was even close to reality the DEC would not be looking to implement a new 5 year deer management plan.  Why?  Because if that number were true and accurate, we would not need a new plan, we'd be looking to tweak an already successful plan and that is just NOT the case!

Back in November 2009, (after the Region 3 DEC deer meeting in Middletown) I found myself in discussion with Director Riexinger, in the back of the auditorium.  We briefly discussed a variety of conservation issues.  One of which, was of course the further implementation of "antler restrictions".  It was at this time that the director lamented to me that her single most "regret" in her tenure as Director of Fish, Wildlife and Marine Resources was that 'she had not furthered the implementation of antler restrictions'.  I remember my exact words and thoughts at that moment.  I said, "Director all it takes to rectify that situation is the stroke of a pen".  I realize that it is a little more complicated than that, but in reality, not much more!  My thoughts, at the time, were that her words allayed a lot of my apprehensions as to which direction the DEC would go.  I walked away from our meeting feeling very good that Director Riexinger was going to do the right thing!  She has NOT! Instead, the DEC has stepped backward into a bucolic malaise as they "hope" the winds of time and a ouija board mentality will show them the way to their new management plan!  

Director Riexinger is viewed and positioned to be Mr Grannis' fall-guy.  It is her reputation and her legacy that remains in question.  She will bear the brunt of the criticism that will be heaped on her along the passage of time.  Her posture, that evening, to me now appears to have been disingenuous and calculated.  She needs to stand and be counted as Dr. Gary Alt did for the amelioration of conservation in his state.

As for me and how wrong I was?  I, like Director Riexinger, are capable of mistakes, or errors in judgment (whichever you prefer), but my mistake was simplistic and borne of a liberal well-intentioned thought and can easily be rectified by a writing such as this.  Director Riexinger's path and policy on antler restrictions now reek of insincerity and apathy!  As sportsmen's numbers dwindle, and the hunting tradition is staggering to the attrition line, It is time for you Director Riexinger to act on behalf of the deer herd and the thousands of outdoorsmen who have proffered this change in deer management philosophy!

What say you, Director Riexinger?