They should limit the amount of children you can load on those high capacity vehicles. I guess you can keep your high capacity vehicles but you have to register them again and you can not load them to capacity unless at home.
CTCrow's Link
I don't agree that people are asking for MORE govenment involvement. What I hear them asking for is for the government that is "already involved", no I mean "in control", do the right thing.
When I hear "Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth" I have to ask myself,......"Maybe it hasn't perished, but it looks really sick???" Every regulation added to the books is freedom lost.
Did I say that I was advocating deer reduction?
Slowly read my post a few times to see if you can understand it before you try telling me what I have acknowledged.
I.E. tick numbers and lyme incidence are shown to decrease as LARGE herd numbers are dramatically reduced....but as numbers go from, say 20 DPSM to 15 DPSM, there is no noticable affect on ticks/lyme.
Is there data to prove or disprove this theory?
" 5 deer/sm is usually well within the margin or error for surveys"
So if the desire number of deer is 8-10 to reduce LD, there is a possibility of having only 3 deer/sm with the +- margin of error?
And even then, ticks will still reside in the subject area in significant enough densities to impact the health of other animals and/or humans who come in direct contact with said ticks, that carry tick diseases?
"Because the hunting tradition in CT has been over run with SUV driving soccer moms from Westchester County NY in Fairfield County and along the Shoreline. Here there are lots of people and lots of deer. The moms want their 4 acre lots in the "country" and don't want to hit a deer with their SUV and don't want sick kids. A hunter's dream right?"
I disagree here:
"But no, hunters are not adapting to the new climate here and instead are pissing off these people by demanding tradition and hunters' rights. They are barking up the wrong tree in an urbanized state like CT."
How can hunters not be adapting? As it is, there are a lot of urban hunters hunting lots of small 2-3 acre parcels. 99.9 of us (making a number up for my benefit) are invited to return hunting the following year so I disagree with you there.
You got to be shitting me on this one:
"And they are extremely pissed off at me for telling them so. Oh well. One can only try to help them help themselves."
The problem is that you want deer densities to be between 8-10 psm and with the acceptable margin of 5-+ (your number not mine) that could be 3 deer psm.
And on top of that you support white buffalo POACHERS and we don't so, we are on the same side as the people you claim we are pissing off.
I think the problem is that guys are wedded to their hunting spots and are not willing to move around to chase high deer densities, they just want them high where they currently have hunting access.
Are you a bow hunter?
I think you don't get it because you are not. If you had been here for a while you would know that the biggest challenge for bow hunters is access to properties. We don't "wed" to the ones we have. We keep them if the are productive.
You would know that there are many types of hunters. We have the purists that will hike 3-5 miles at 3-4 am to get away from everyone else and we range all the way to back yard weekend warriors. I hunt both large woods and 20-30 yards behind the swing set.
I hunt to fill my freezer. When I hunt those small 2-4 acre properties I don't look at it as hunting. I look at it as helping land owner remove pest from his property and I get to eat healthy meals.
If you went and knocked on doors you would realize its not as easy as chasing the deer densities as you call it.
CTCrow's Link
As a Deer Warden, I (we) referred a number of hunters to private property owners in Redding. Some called us after Streit had pissed them off by telling them that HE, and he alone, would determine who would hunt there. Imagine that, being told that a stranger would decide who gets to be on YOUR property! A number of these residents loved the fact that as Deer Wardens we would introduce them to someone, and let them decide if they liked each other. When the First Selectman's office wanted to encourage more hunting on Private Properties, she asked the Deer Wardens (and NOT Dave Streit or his group) to hold a public meeting, and she sent a letter suggesting that residents with deer problems call the Deer Wardens.
The Redding sponsored Deer Wardens managed the hunting on 1200 acres of Town property. We also referred Hunters on dozens of private properties.
We shot significantly more does than bucks in order to bring down the over population of deer, and we reported our results to the Selectman and the Conservation Commission at a meeting open to the public each year.
Apparently we were successful enough at reducing the deer population that once White Buffalo came in they were only able to find and kill half the deer they wanted to.
If Dave Streit was the expert on Redding Deer and Ticks and Lyme Disease, why did he never join the town sponsored effort? Why did he refuse to even cooperate with that effort? One can only wonder.
Of course the real story here, is that the presence of WB was unnecessary to begin with, except for the fact that the aforementioned Dave Streit, lied to the Selectmen, and told them that a Deer Population of 10 per square mile would eliminated Lyme Disease.
(anyone else noticing how: "Dave Streit lied" has become a common theme?) Just remember who said he was a spokesman for WB.
Dave Streit started a group called BeSafeRedding.org, as far as is known he and his hunters, took just a few deer, and since they never reported their results to any Town Official, despite being asked to do so many times, it is logical to assume that perhaps he and his boys were merely hunting for big bucks, apparently mostly unsuccessfully. A few of the hunters removed from our program joined up with Streit; And judging from the ones I met in the field, some of them targeted spotted fawns, and some were fine with trespassing and breaking laws.
There are a number of guys on this site who hunted in Redding. Along come a couple of new posters, who refuse to register under their real names, who are connected closely with a Deer Killing operation, they come here and tell you that what you are seeing with your own eyes isn't true.
Dave Streit can tell us about the Emperor and his lovely attire all he wants, only Scott Williams is buying it (or pretending to). Perhaps one should merely assume they both get a thrill at seeing the other one sans clothing. Whatever gets you two through the night, we're not here to judge.
Only on the internet can jokers like this continue to get any sort of an audience.
Dave Streit and Scott Williams, you two have typed so many lies, and have been shown to be wrong so many times, that now you are just embarrassing yourselves.
Keep it up please, I'm honest enough to admit that I enjoy laughing at how pathetic you are.
LOL, ok, this is me pulling the string again. SPEAK:
" Ace now altho it was not me, do you suppose maybe the whole spotted fawn the game was blown a little out of proportion because you were upset someone else was hunting your ex wife's property? "
No JD, I had access to 1200 acres of town land, I could have hunted any one of those pieces. I also visited hundreds of acres of Private Property where Landowners asked me to send them a hunter, one of them was over 100 acres, the guys who I introduced to that landowner were pretty psyched. They hunted it as a team, they shot several does, and both the landowner and hunters were very happy.
I was asked to personally hunt another piece that was well over 100 acres, I declined because I already had too many places to hunt, including other property I own. Which by the way includes 7+ acres a few hundred yards from where they were shooting fawns.
I could have hunted any of those places I chose to, access was not (and is not) a problem. Guys who post here will tell you that I gave them some of the most promising spots they have ever had in Redding.
Perhaps Redding hunters are upset because the guy you praise so much has decided that 10 deer per sq mile is the right number in a town that can (and will) sustain much more. He lies and cheats to make his point. And he doesn't have the balls to even post here under his real name.
Back to your friends: When I nicely pointed out that shooting Spotted Fawns was illegal in CT, the 'hunters' involved told me to go to hell. Maybe they believed me when the EnConn officer went to the place they checked the deer in, explained to them that they shouldn't have given replacement tags for illegal deer, and then called them in MA.
All they had to do was admit that they didn't know they shouldn't shoot baby deer and tell the DEP that it was an honest mistake, but I guess that was too big a blow to their egos, so they denied that the spots were spots.
What kind of person needs so badly to kill deer that they have to kill illegally? I bet those 35 pound fawns are mounted and on the wall now right?
Why don't you just say that you don't care about other members of publics' concerns, you don't care about their health, you want deer densities inflated for your recreational pursuits? In fact, I think it was LF who was saying this previously. Don't continue to say that you guys should be the ones to do the job and then continue to fail to do so. The game is up. Ask municipal officials throughout FF County and see what they think of hunters' abilities. Shelton, Redding, Wilton. I'd suggest that you guys coordinate and put up some results you can point to and say "See".
(No disrespect JD). I've just heard this so many times here. As a hunter I get it. You don't want a mercenary taking deer that you would otherwise have access to. But I'm trying to provide a solution to gripes about sharpshooting. But clearly you guys just want to gripe about sharpshooters shooting the deer that you can't or won't during the 4.5 month season and don't want to take steps to help yourselves.
Here's how the scenario goes. See if it sounds familiar.
1. Town decides they need fewer deer.
2. Town opens up lands to hunting.
3. Hunters have great hunting for a couple years because there are zillions of deer and boy are they dumb.
4. Hunters take numerous dumb deer and leave the smart ones and educate the rest further.
5. Deer learn to avoid hunted properties.
6. Neighbors see a lot of deer still on their properties where hunting is not permitted and hunters do not see many where hunting is permitted.
7. Town says "boy we still have lots of deer."
8. Hunters start blogs titled "Where are all the deer?"
9. Hunter effort goes down in Town because deer are super smart and have moved into non hunted areas and it's not worth the effort when neighboring towns have 2 zillion dumb deer/square mile.
10. Local hunters are mad and blame one guy for advocating for increased hunting opportunity.
11. Town is miffed cause they still have lots of deer.
12. Town may look for alternative solutions to hunting and say, "boy we tried hunting but we still have tons of deer, just in different places than before. Maybe hunting doesn't work."
13. Now hunters are really mad and are hung out to dry.
It's being played out through many towns in CT and the recipe and players are all very similar. While you may not want to hear it, just trying to turn the tide. But guess I need a bigger shovel.
Really? they won't even post their real names, do you think they are going to have the balls to meet anyone face to face? They're asking us to believe what they say How 'bout for starters, don't lie about who you are. Anything you have to say after that is not worth listening to.
I've invited one of them to a 3D shoot. And both of them to have a cup of coffee. There's another 3D this Sunday at the Raccoon Club. How about both of them come and take a walk through the woods. They don't even have to shoot. Imagine the possibilities.
If Odocoileus isn't even willing to admit that he's Scott Williams, of the CT Agricultural Extension Station (formerly of White Buffalo, and evidently still a night shooting sharpshooter).
And if Lymefree isn't willing to admit that he's David Streit of BeSafeRedding.org and the Fairfield County Deer Alliance and spokesman for White Buffalo ...
What are the chances that either of them would you for a cup of coffee or a 3D shoot?
Does Scott Williams even shoot a bow? I understand that Dave Streit uses a crossbow, I guess that "shoulder injury" got him permission back when it was just for the handicapped.
Oops, Scott Williams, did you just out Dave Streit?
Funny thing is he didn't shoot any of those deer in Redding, yes he did, no he didn't.
I don't even come close to thinking that "sharpshooters walk around at night trespassing on multiple properties taking deer at will." Don't make the mistake of assuming what I think.
They want deer removed so they are not helpless victims unwillingly subjected to the "lyme disease epedemic" that has been propagated to them.
Again don't make the mistake of assuming that I think there is any "conspiracy" going on here as much as you like to throw around that buzzword.
That makes at least two things you were wrong about today.
If he is correct and there are pockets of incredibly high deer numbers then he will have no problem telling you where they are. And I'm sure you will see all the sign and the incredible deforestation. Put up some cameras in those areas, see how many you see,see if you get pictures of lots of fawns.
If he claims to not have access, he can just tell you where they are and I'll get permission on properties in that neighborhood and we'll look around together and you can show me where I'm wrong.
He will not be able to show you what is not there.
The "pockets" of high deer densities are a figment of his imagination. The residents who claim there are still way too many deer are all living in his house. Call the Selectman's office, get in touch with people on the Conservation Commission. Ask them if they still see lots of deer.
The number he seeks, 10 per square mile, is the problem. THAT is what hunters are objecting to.
If you have any desire to ensure the Integrity of your research, you'll attempt to determine actual numbers.
Or just blindly believe him, and continue to be wrong.
Rick Jaccarino - Property owner where White Buffalo, Inc. killed ( 16 ) deer illegally in Redding, CT - 203-788-3556
Chris - Block Island, RI - Where White Buffalo killed 100 + deer with corn in late winter - 401-447-7385
Howard Kilpatrick ( Shelton ,CT ) - I am sure that Howard will be able to explain to you how he counted 925 deer for Shelton in 2013; but the Shelton Conservation Committee used numbers from 2009 ( 1,531 ) for their proposal to start the Shelton Deer Committee from an artificially inflated deer number. If he does`nt know I`m sure that your little buddy Dave ( Deer Alliance ) does.
I've little tolerance for the tin foil hat people, who see a mountain lion behind every bush in every town in CT, or create their own conspiracies and dispute scientific studies as "junk science" when it goes against their ideals. Show me the money and I'll believe it. Until then, it's simply lies posted on the reverse sewer some call the Internet. And some are far more adept than others in this plight.
What's your stance on people who post under false names or anonymously?
What's your feeling on said people(s) claim to the moral high ground?
How do you prove a negative?
I'll give it a shot:
-There one isn't, and there isn't another deer. No deer over there, and none over there as well. That's a total of 4 deer that aren't there so far, and we're just getting started.
Are you for real or are you trying to be funny?
So you are going to single handedly ...(with the help of slyme) fix that. Fake name and all. Oh the irony....
Odocoileus's Link
Odocoileus's Link
A dead animal's body is often referred to as a carcass, not caucus. "I know a guy" is not credible proof. And everything posted on the Internet is not necessarily true. And for a hunter, your arguments sure sound that that of a PETA member.
Folks who are allergic to something are usually advised to avoid it.
People who are allergic to dogs generally don't get a dog for a pet, that can apply to cats as well.
I suppose one could also propose ridding the town of dogs and cats, or cutting down the offending trees and plants; but avoiding them, or living where they aren't present would work as well.
Are you trying to suggest that a post about a guy in Idaho who has a lot of allergies somehow proves that deer are dumb until they are educated by hunters, unless of course they are shot by the aforementioned hunters, whereby they become carcasses?
Without top predators, deer in unhunted areas are dumb, until of course they are educated to the lethal threat repeatedly by hunters. Then they smarten up real quick. Do you dispute this?
Yes and no. Not trying to be coy here but your example typifies the term "oversimplification".
If hunters hunt poorly, and by that I mean they ignore wind direction (not just for hunting but for approaching their stand), if they over-hunt the same stand they will definitely educate deer and their sightings will steadily decrease.
The oversimplification is assuming this is a universal occurrence and also in ignoring some very obvious realities encountered when hunting in an urban setting.
Obvious reality #1-when hunting small woodlots in urban settings smart hunters can use human scent to their advantage by setting up as close to areas of human activity as is safe and possible (to not alert landowners who might not be in favor of hunting-for clarification on the term "possible"). Let's use an example where deer travel from a north to south direction through the woodlot and you have a choke point right inside the woods from a home or group of homes. Deer will quickly acclimate to the presence of human scent provided it isn't strong inside the wood line.
In the early season in CT wind direction predominantly is out of the south, so taking advantage of this scenario and still spacing hunts out one can enjoy several successful hunts from this stand provided they hunt in the aforementioned south wind and additionally ensure they do not skirt bedding areas from upwind. All of the above is just common sense good hunting strategy. Good hunters get it and practice it.
Obvious reality#2-good hunters consisently rotate their stands. For example I hunt a 250 acre property in Harwinton that I have 9 stands set up on. Some are in food sources, some in travel corridors. I have some set up to hunt only in a south wind, some for west winds and some for north winds. I have 2 stands that I do not hunt until the rut. I personally know many others who practice a similar strategy and I don't find it coincidental that they have success rates significantly above the statewide average for bowhunting. I should also emphasis that the property I mention is big woods hunting; I do not have the luxury of deer somewhat acclimated to human scent.
You do have a point about educating deer; bowhunting success rates don't range from the low teens to low 20's for nothing. Obviously there are hunters out there who for a variety of reasons do educate deer; I will acknowledge that facet but will never agree to a projection that it is universal.
You are offended by me referring to deer as dumb
Can you post a citation of some poster's here who has expressed that offense? I can't recall anyone claiming to be offended by that analysis of yours and suspect there's a bit of projection on your part.
A dead animal's body is often referred to as a carcass, not caucus.
Given the state of governance in Hartford and DC I'm starting to think referring to a dead animal as a "caucus" might be apropos.
And for a hunter, your arguments sure sound that that of a PETA member.
Hyperbole at its finest. Advocating for responsible stewardship and advocating for no hunting, no pet ownerwhip, no animal husbandry are worlds removed from one another. It is insulting to conflate the two ideologies at work.
Now seeing as you continue to posit yourself as the advocate of truth, justice and the American way perhaps you would care to answer the 2 questions I posed:
What's your stance on people who post under false names or anonymously?
What's your feeling on said people(s) claim to the moral high ground?
And people who think they know more than everyone else are allways referred to as assholes.
please correct my typos professor.
"Dr. Scott " Carcass " Williams........That is the dumbest statement I have scene on this site in the past year ! For someone who refers to deer as carcasses; breaks Federal Law by transporting (16 ) illegally taken deer across NY State lines and then plays games on Bowsite.com without even using your own name......you have some nerve coming on this site and referring to deer as dumb and me a liar. Put up or Shut up !......You dumb _ _ _ _ _ _ _ take your foot out of your mouth !"
And this: "Scott; both of these witnesses are expecting a call from you to confirm my statements on Bowsite.com........Man up and call ! Rick Jaccarino - Property owner where White Buffalo, Inc. killed ( 16 ) deer illegally in Redding, CT - 203-788-3556
Chris - Block Island, RI - Where White Buffalo killed 100 + deer with corn in late winter - 401-447-7385
Howard Kilpatrick ( Shelton ,CT ) - I am sure that Howard will be able to explain to you how he counted 925 deer for Shelton in 2013; but the Shelton Conservation Committee used numbers from 2009 ( 1,531 ) for their proposal to start the Shelton Deer Committee from an artificially inflated deer number. If he does`nt know I`m sure that your little buddy Dave ( Deer Alliance ) does."
Just responding to attacks on me is all.
But he will of course continue to avoid the last two questions Mike asked him several times.
After getting nowhere with the DEEP, I went to the Redding Police Department and filed charges against White Buffalo for shooting from their truck and killing deer on Town of Redding property. I was told they would investigate. Two days later I received a call from them and they informed me they were not going to do anything and that the DEEP had already looked into the situation and it is now closed. I was also informed that I could pickup a copy of the case report in a day or so. I have been waiting for a copy of the report for five months now.
I then sent a response too Susan Whalen of the DEEP and explained to her the situation and that my tenant a Wilton police officer had also seen White Buffalo shooting deer on town of Redding property from their truck. He also provider her with a sworn statement. She told me they were not going to do anything.
This whole tick study thing seems to be very politically motivated to say the least. The papers will not print letters that I send in and will only print what they want us to believe about the tick study, their version.
Julia Pemberton our selectman has been complicit in this whole mess and I am looking forward voting her out of office come election time. As for Scott Williams maybe someone will finally realize what they have done down here in Redding and he will hopefully be looking for new employment.
And Crow, it's "always" not "allways" [sic]. And "please" should be capitalized as it's the first word in that sentence.
See, I really don't care what you think. You use a fake name, lie and avoid answering questions.
Nobody here is buying what you are selling.
Now that Rick posted you dismiss it and claim someone is using a fake name. I believe that's called a hypocrite.
Any typos?
Crow, you truly have a fitting screen name. Caw caw from the periphery. Caw.
And then I'll pull up bowsite and show them all your posts. Are you now ashamed?
Let's just call this game. It's over. Lets move on. Enough.
I heard CAES staff took blood samples from the staged kill site on Topstone and ran real time PCR and determined it was not deer blood. And I heard that EnConn walked off the scene cause they knew it to be completely bogus! "
Here we have Scott Williams ( Odo ) in an attempt to say that WB crime scene`s were staged ! If Scott Williams of the CAES needs crime scene pictures we still have some 20-30 on file and can email both the pictures and case files to anyone interested. CT DEEP Case file # C143367 ( Black Rock Trpk ), C143367 ( Top Ledge Road ) Supplementary; determined that WB ( 26-7 ) had broken the DEEP special permission granted them to operate but still DEEP Wildlife Division would not prosecute. Many of CT ECON officers are disgusted with the Wildlife Division and how they have handled the Redding situation.
Dr. Scott Williams, hunters how see him for what he really is; a man in the middle of a CDC ITM study with no credibility.
Next time you guys stage a scene, do your homework first. The scene described is indicative of a deer killed by blood loss from an arrow or bolt fired from some device, something which you guys have tons of knowledge about. Beyond that, you have little. I also find it curious you left out the bit about the blood samples taken and real time PCR to determine speciation out of your repost. Hmmmm.
Bloodtrail, it is you guys who should be ashamed. My kids and I will be just fine. Thanks for your concern.
You hit it on the head for me. I knew nothing about this situation before odo and lyme started to post and now i know that state and local officials are in bed with WB and ignore violations.
If hunters broke half the rules that WB did we d be in jail.
You represent the state of CT. And you are not ashamed of your actions if your children knew how you have behaved here...
Well, you have me stumped now.
Why would anyone makeup a crime scene; White Buffalo and their shooters are already doing a good job of breaking the CT DEEP special permission regulations. If the CAES has some " blood evidence " that Ryan Rodtz made up the crime scene or is using a weapons system not authorized under the special permission granted by CT DEEP; please provide us on Bowsite.com with this information and we will forward it to the CT DEEP.
Now we come to the part of you saying that White Buffalo is only following the rules and they haven`t broken any. I believe the rules you posted clearly state - no shooting from a motor vehicle. Didn`t Mr Jaccarino just post the fact that White Buffalo shot 16 deer from their motor vehicle ? I recall that a Wilton police officer also witnessed them according to his statement. Is your point here that White Buffalo and Scott Williams are above the law ? Or is it the fact that CT DEEP chose not to prosecute White Buffalo because of their CT DEEP 26-7 voluntary status which makes them a CT DEEP employee. Dr. Scott Williams, with three children I am sure you have better things to do than to post nonsense on Bowsite.com.
Odo out.
I was open to listen to both sides argue until the post from the Redding resident. It upsets me when state and local officials dismiss complaints from the residents and treat us like serbs and they are the upper class.
This is not about LD or ticks or deer its about someone using the system to benefit themselves. You lost all credibility with me.
Some of us have been involved with Dave Streit for much longer than others. Scott Williams came to Redding more recently, and pretty quickly demonstrated the sort of behavior you have witnessed here on Bowsite.
I know a lot PhDs, the vast majority of them realize that their credibility is everything with regard to their research. A brief summary:
A Tick study was proposed.
A Tick study was commenced.
Rules were established for the Tick study.
Those rules were flouted and routinely ignored.
But don't worry the results will be reported accurately and honestly. Said results will be reliable.
I might have been born at night, but it wasn't last night.