Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Topics - Rancid Crabtree

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 13
31
Whitetail Deer / Oscar the imposter and Dolly the doe
« on: September 24, 2013, 07:02:45 PM »
Every bowhunting season I try something new in regards to technique or gear. This year I am hunting completely new property since my uncle sold the family farm and these new properties that I am bowhunting lend themselves to something I have been wanting to further explore and that?s deer decoying so new lands and decoying is the focus for this season.

I had made a homemade buck decoy about 25 years ago but the old family farm was mostly river bottom and cedar swamp too thick for the sight lines required for effective decoying. So the homemade buck decoy has been sitting in the chicken coop at my parent?s farm for the last 25 years. I knew I would return to decoying at some point but I didn?t think it would take 25 years. Last week I bought a used Flambeau boss buck decoy off Craigslist and after reading about decoying during the rut I will add a bedded doe decoy to the set . FYI, everything I have read says leave antler off the buck to make him look weak and the more dominant buck will approach the decoy from the missing antler side. I plan to test that theory.



So I retrieved the old homemade buck decoy from the coop and set about doing a sex change operation to convert the standing buck decoy to a bedded doe. Over the years this decoy has deteriorated quite a bit. The homemade ears are gone and the body is pretty dented up but its still repairable.  Like most ladies, Dolly has many facets and layers.



Back in the day I tried my hand at taxidermy so I made the front half of that old decoy with a shoulder mount, form from Van void?s Taxidermy supply. I added glass eyes and painted it with latex paint. I made the body from several layers of 1 inch thick, blue construction foam and wood and then carved it with my mother?s electric turkey carving knife. (oh the memories)

I needed to turn this heavy necked foam form into a skinny neck doe so I upgraded my tools and employed a sawsall with a long blade to take several inches off the neck of this form. Then I sawed off the bottom of the body and added a plywood base since it is supposed to be a bedded doe.



Then I painted her with flat brown paint, a little black and some white paint. For the ears I used an old plastic Easter basket that I cut apart and made wooden bases with a wire inserted into it so I can add and remove the ears as needed. I painted the ears brown, white and black. Not bad for an old Easter basket.







To add motion to both decoys I cut out a tyvek house wrap tail since its nice and white and thin and waterproof and will flap in the breeze. I then covered the tyvek with a smaller tail cut out of brown fabric. I added tyvek to the ears so they move in the breeze. The ear tyveck is held on with a Velcro patch. Here is the tail moving is a very modest breeze.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnxXlOjHL8Y&feature=youtu.be

Dolly the Doe





Oscar the imposter and Dolly the doe.





Now I have to wait for Dolly to get rid of that new doe smell by leaving her out in the sun and rain for the next 3 weeks as I wait for the pre-rut and then set the video camera out during some field hunts.





32
Whitetail Deer / Deer trustee report action team updates
« on: March 09, 2013, 09:27:27 PM »
Today was the first meeting of the Deer Trustee action teams. These teams are made up of members of the public that would commit to 7 meetings over the next few months to take the 62 recommendations of the Kroll report and discuss how to implement them.

Here is a snip from the deer trustee report website:

?As a starting point in the process of taking the final recommendations of the report and transition them into action on the ground, the DNR will be coordinating a public involvement process that that will be driven by the public through action teams oriented around the specific recommendations of the report.

The four DTR action teams that have been identified are as follows:
 ?Deer Management Assistance Program (DMAP);
?herd health / chronic wasting disease (CWD);
 ?regulations and season structure
 ?science and research.
 
Whether you are content or dissatisfied with your deer hunting, this is your chance to help lay a path for the future of deer management in Wisconsin.?

You can learn more about the roles and duties of the teams at this link.

http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/wildlifehabitat/trustee.html

Because the DNR is soliciting public participation and involvement and because I am a member of that general public and a deer hunter and a private wildlife manager and a bowhunter, I drove 3 hours through the snowstorm today to lend my efforts towards this task.

Sadly of the roughly 700,000 deer hunters in WI, only about 40 of them bothered to participate. The DNR picked a location (Stevens Point) that was centrally located to maximize participation but only a very small number of hunters bothered to show. The other 699,960 will no doubt make the time to complain afterwards if something is not to their liking.

Aside from the roughly 40 members of the public were about as many DNR staff and a reporter (Paul Smith from the Mile Journal). I took a few pictures of today?s event.

Here is the view of the room showing the participants and DNR staff. (too many empty chairs in my opinion) Perhaps the commitment of that many meetings scared people away.



The DNR went through all the roles and duties and the timeline for the work to be completed. Then the 4 action teams were explained so each of us was able to make up our minds as to which team we wanted to be a part of.

I was most interested in the regulations and season structure action team. Ours was the largest but still was only made up of 15 people and 4 DNR support staff. Here they are.



The DNR broke up the 62 recommendations from the Kroll report and divided them among the 4 action teams. The regulations and season structure action team was to tackle:

Reduce the number of DMUs and combine the Farmland regions. **

Hunting Regulations, Seasons and Bag Limits section

Simplify the regulatory process by setting antlerless harvest goals, harvest regulations and
antlerless permit quotas on a 3-5 year cycle.

Base Antlerless Permit Quotas on DMU historical demand.

Increase the cost of all antlerless tags for Regular and Herd Control Units to $12.

Consider charging a fee for antlerless tags in the CWD Zone. **

Establish a public lands antlerless permit system.

Limit antlerless deer harvest in Regular and Herd Control Zones.

Re-evaluate the effectiveness of the October antlerless seasons in the CWD Zone.**

Maintain the current buck limit of one buck per Deer Gun License (may be used in muzzleloader season) and one buck per Archery Deer License.

Maintain the Bonus Buck Regulation in CWD Zone. **

Resolve the cross-bow season issue through the public involvement process.

Resolve the baiting and feeding issue outside CWD affected areas.

Put the fun back into hunting by simplifying seasons, bag limits and youth qualifications!

Develop a public lands antlerless permit system.

Should the Conservation Congress have a more active role in deer management decision-making at the local level?

Those topics with a ** are topic that are shared between our action team and other action teams because they overlap so multiple groups will weigh in on those topics.

We went through the list of topics which were posed around the room on large sheets of paper. We were given sticky notes and were to right down thoughts and suggestions and question or requests for info from the DNR that will help us arrive at conclusions at the next meetings.  We discussed each topic and then generated sticky notes that we deposited on the papers around the room. The DNR staff gathered those sticky notes to prepare for the next meetings. Here are some of the members depositing their thoughts, ideas, questions and requests of the DNR in preparation for the next meeting.



In order to engage more of the public in this process, the DNR has created a rough draft of a survey that will be made available to the public. We were tasked with refining those survey questions. Aside from questions directly related to the Kroll report, additional concepts and questions could be added so the DNR could include them in this public information gathering. I snapped a photo of this additional question while depositing my sticky note.



I asked one of the DNR staffers to give me his best guess at to whether or not he thought the DNR would be going to a tele-check (internet and phone) deer registration system and he said yes, its most likely going to happen and perhaps as soon as 2014. Personally I think that is welcomed news.

As we wrapped up our meeting I walked around the room looking at the items we would be addressing and the sticky notes left by the other action team members. Here are a few of them and the sticky note comments and questions.









Today?s event and the following meetings were/are to be live streamed via the web but a glitch prevented that live web stream today. The meeting was recorded and is now available for viewing (except for the break-out meetings of the 4 action teams)

Our next meeting takes place April 6th. This might be a concern for some as that is the same weekend as the Youth mentored turkey hunt and the Deer and Turkey expo in Madison. I will continue to update as we progress.

33
Whitetail Deer / Improving WI deer registration
« on: March 08, 2013, 06:39:03 AM »
I have been thinking lately about the very antiquated deer registration system in WI and looking at how other states are accomplishing deer registrations. It seems WI is alone in only allowing in-person registration. I don't know about other bowhunters but I find it inconvenient to take my deer on road trips for the sole purpose of registering it in front of some teenaged girl at a gas station that doesn't want anything to do with me or my deer since she has customers to deal with. Not to mention that sometimes we bowhunters don't recover our deer until after the registration stations have closed for the day. The purpose of registration is to report the harvest to the state. That can be done in variety of ways.

Opening weekend last year was in the 80 F. We do not gut our deer in the woods and take them back to the farm to gut, wash and cool. That is the first trip our deer take in the back of my truck and I would just as soon that be the only trip since I would like to get that deer cut up and on ice ASAP. There has to be a better way to report that harvest to the state.

WI allows turkey and goose hunters to register their birds via phone in and online services and the DNR agrees that system is working so why not extend that ease and convenience to deer hunters? Other states allow deer hunters to use a tele-check system like WI already allows for turkey hunters so the technology already in place and according to the DNR, working well.




Yesterday the DNR held a moderated online chat for people to ask questions and the question about deer registration came up a few times. Here are the questions and DNR replies.

Question:  How close is the DNR to a call in registration for deer similar to geese??

DNR answer: We evaluating telecheck and how to balance havest information (age/sex) and law enforcement needs with the telecheck option. There is a team working on this now.?

Question: Will deer registration continue at stores or will I have to register online? ?

DNR answer: We will be addressing the question of tele-check through out the deer trustee report public meetings. There has been no decision made whether or not we will be requiring hunters to register their deer using a different method other than in-person registration. I suggest you take the up-coming deer trustee report survey which will launch be live soon. Check out the deer trustee report page by going to dnr.wi.gov and keyword search "deer trustee report" the survey will be located there once it is live.

Question: Is there any talk about calling in your harvested deer rather than bringing it to a station. Illinois seems to have success. 

DNR answer:  We will likely go to a system where hunters can either call in to register their deer or register online.?

Question: Are businesses who register deer being consulted about in person registration? Are they worried they would loose revenue?? 

DNR answer: We have been talking with registration stations. Some have let us know that they will miss the revenue while others have said they won't mind. As part of an electronic registration system, kiosks located at old registration stations may be used, resulting in revenue still coming into these stations. 

Here is another reply from the DNR in regards to additional ways to register deer: We anticipate eventually going to some form of electronic registration system for deer registration. As with all of the recomendations, we will only move forward with this recomendation with public support. An electronic registration system will make it much easier for hunters to register deer.

And

An electronic registration system was a recomendation made in the report. States that have swtiched from in-person registration to an electronic version have seen similar registration rates between the two systems. In some cases, a higher percentage of deer may be registered with Telecheck because it it easier to register a deer. Wardens will still be looking for violations in registration.

So with this in mind, I am considering a citizen resolution in my county for the spring hearings that asks that the DNR and NRB improve the registration process by adding two additional ways for hunters to register their deer. Those methods would be phone and internet and based on the comments from the DNR they are already anticipating this change and have even figured out that kiosks at current registration stations would allow those people without a phone or the internet to register their deer and for those that seem to enjoy taking their deer on road trips to show them off.

So if you would like to assist in this improvement to deer registration, all you need to do is take a resolution to your county meeting. The more counties it gets passed in the more likely it is to be advanced to next years statewide questionnaire. If you would like to be part of this change, reply here or send me a PM and I can get a resolution sent to you. All you need do is print it, sign it and take it to your meeting.

34
For Sale Misc. / For Sale 6 Rage, 2 blade 100 gr plus more
« on: August 25, 2012, 05:05:40 PM »
SOLD!

35
Archery / How to select your next bow
« on: August 22, 2012, 07:52:19 AM »
As you search for your next new bow, look at reviews and the bow makers web sites to understand the bows performance. All makers will list the bows IBO speed. (IBO speed comes from a 70 lb bow shooting a 350 grain arrow) that is an arrow weight of 5 grains per pound of draw.

Because they post the speed and you know the arrow weight you can calculate KE this way

IBO speed x IBO speed x arrow weight of 350 gr. Divided by 450240 (mathematical constant) Here is an example

315 x 315 x 350 divided by 450240 = 77.1 KE.

Since the draw weight they used is 70 lbs, you take the KE and divide it by the draw weight.

77.1 KE divided by 70 lbs draw = 1.10 efficiency.

Efficiency is just the amount of draw weight you have to pull back vs what you get for that effort in terms of KE and momentum. I suggest steering clear of bows that fall below 1.0 efficiency because you have to work harder (pull more draw weight) to get more out of the bow and because most bows today are above 1.0, you don?t have to select an inefficient bow

Outdoor life just did a review of 11 new bows. Using the info from their test (70 Lb bow shooting a 350 gr. Arrow) I derived the following efficiencies.

Bowtech Insanity CPX = 1.28

Darton DS 3900 = 1.25

Strother Wrath = 1.24

PSE EVO 7 = 1.19

Mathews Heli-m = 1.15

Hoyt vector 32 = 1.14

Ross Crave DRT = 1.08

G5 Prime = 1.05

Bear Anarchy = 1.05

Mission Riot = .97

Parker Velocity = .92

Once you find the most efficient bows based on the data, understand that you wont be shooting the 5 grains per pound of draw from the tests and will see even more efficiency when you shoot a hunting arrow weight in the 6, 7 or 8 grains of arrow weight per pound of draw.

But you say you?re not a 70 pound bow shooter (they are becoming rare) and you want to instead shoot 55 or 60 pounds of draw, never fear, the efficiency from the test was a product of draw weight vs KE which was derived from a fixed arrow weight per pound of draw. You can expect that same efficiency with lower draw weights since its inherent to the design of the bow. 

Next, go to several dealerships and shoot the bows that are high in efficiency to evaluate their noise and hand shock and comfort. You may find the most pleasing bow is not the most efficient but when you do your evaluation insist (since its your money and you are the customer) that you shoot arrows that are in the 6 or 7 grains per pound of draw weight you plan to hunt with. Don?t let them make you shoot a super light arrow just to show how fast the bow is. Why would you want to test drive a bow that is not in the configuration you will be using???

You may find that while marketing and hype and fan-boy-ism tells you that you should be buying a Mathews or Bowtech, your homework done in advance and your test drive may have you selecting a Darton or Strother because its more efficient and feels better.

In the end, you may be getting the same KE (penetration) from a 50 Lbs PSE or Hoyt than you could get from shooting a 60 Lbs Mathews or Bowtech. Do your homework and forget the hype. Your buying performance, not a brand name. Calculate the numbers, shoot some bows and make an informed choice. You may find that the least efficient and performing bow feels the best in your hands. You will just need to shoot a higher draw weight to get the same KE, MO and speed that you could have got from a more efficient model.



36
Archery / Bow testing data from Sherwood Forest
« on: August 20, 2012, 08:39:06 PM »


For the last few years I?ve been running a bow testing station at our clubs annual shoot. This year I tested 32 bows. The data shown is for 29 of the bows (I omitted the 3 trad bows and youth bows.)

I rarely see very many old bows (10 years or older). After running their bows through the test, I offer to have them test again using tip weights ranging from 125 to 200 grains (125, 145, 200 grains) to see how their bows perform with a heavier total arrow weight. Most show modest to rather noticeable improvement by increasing tip weight. Nearly every archer was using 100 grain points. 

Most archers I encounter care (are aware of) bow speed due to marketing even though its very rare to ever see an IBO hunting rig. The majority shoot light weight setups in terms of arrow weight  per pounds of draw weight. Nearly all would benefit from shooting 8 grains per pound of draw weight  by getting improved KE, FOC, arrow stability, reduced noise and hand shock but when faced with reduced speed, they opt for the speed number over improved performance.

It would appear that it is the rare occasion in which the archer buys a bow and then tests and establishes what arrow and tip weight offer optimal performance prior to buying arrows and broadheads. Most are not maximizing the potential their gear has to offer. I would assume archery pro shops could or would provide such a service allowing buyers to optimize their setups before settling on arrows and tip weights and broadheads but it does not appear that the majority have taken advantage of such optimization and are instead prone to marketing trends and advertising.

Last year I was impressed with Bowtech bows (still am). This year, PSE bows produced the highest efficiency/output. (Top 2 bows) with a PSE (Supra) set at 50 Lbs propelling a mid weight arrow (7.3 grains per Lb) at nearly 280 FPS with an efficiency rating of 1.26. The other PSE, also propelling a mid weight arrow (7.5 grains per lb) with an efficiency rating of 1.24.

37
Archery / Tinkering with another bow design
« on: June 30, 2012, 08:12:33 PM »
I?m contemplating designing/building a different version of a bow .  Ive killed deer with a variety of bows over the years and bore easily. A recent bill affecting bowhunting in WI finally created a statutory definition of what a bow is for the purposes of hunting. Until then, the only definition of what a bow is resided in administrative code. The statue that defines what a bow is for the purposes of hunting reads as follows.

29.001(17) " Bow ," when used with reference to hunting, means a bow , drawn and held by and through the effort of the person releasing it, but does not include a crossbow.

While vague, this legal definition allows for a variety of bow construction. Since I hope to design/build a bow that is legal for hunting I contacted the DNR seeking input on what I am planning. As I currently have it designed, my bow is going to be made from  almost conventional materials and methods and currently I plan to build it from
a treated 2 x 4
an old drawer front
tooth brush
dry wall joint tape
glues
rubber bands
wood screws
a short bow string
and other various and sundry items from the local hardware store.

WI laws stipulates that for hunting, a bow must have a minimum of 30 pounds of draw weight. Its my hope to build this bow with about 40 pounds of draw. As it was initially designed, the bow did not have any limbs (but then the legal definition does not include such a requirement so that should not be an issue).

Not looking to create ways to get in trouble with the DNR I enquired with the DNR as to the legality of such a design. I was told that because the design did not have limbs that ?bow?, that it is not a legal bow for hunting. While the state statute says nothing about limbs it does include the word ?bow? as part of the definition of the word bow. the email I received from the DNR did include a copy/paste from the Merriam Webster online dictionary.

Webster

1a : something bent into a simple curve

2a :  weapon that is made of a strip of flexible material (as wood) with a cord connecting the two ends and holding the strip bent and that is used to propel an arrow

While I see no legal requirement to change the design, I changed it after reading that email to incorporate flexible/bending limbs that ?bow? and made sure to have a cord connecting the two ends of the limbs. The current design now meets Webster?s definition as well as WI statute (since state statute say ?Bow means ANY bow????????..?) and this design certainly meets all the definitions and falls under ?ANY? bow.  This will satisfy the state and Mr. Webster.

This design will use a conventional fletched arrow of normal length as well as using a conventional broadhead and will be drawn and held solely by and through the effort of the person releasing it. I?ve built a few bows in my time. My first was back in 1988. This is not like those other bows. Not having tried such a method I know not what to expect or if it will even work. Even if it doesn?t work I will have discovered a new way NOT to make a bow and there is always something to be learned from attempting and not succeeding. My favorite  quote comes from Thomas Edison. On being asked how he felt about repeatedly failing to design a working light bulb Edison said

"I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work"       Thomas Edison

He also said:

?Results? Why, man, I have gotten lots of results! If I find 10,000 ways something won't work, I haven't failed. I am not discouraged, because every wrong attempt discarded is often a step forward....   Thomas Edison

Never be afraid to fail. Failing to try is a far worse fate.      Me

The ultimate goal here is to devise a contraption ( that is not currently a hunting bow used in my home state) capable of delivering a broadhead tipped arrow with sufficient energy to quickly dispatch a white-tailed deer and to do so by crafting it with inexpensive and easily attainable materials. (for perhaps less than $20)

Since this first attempt is a low fidelity prototype which will hopefully lead to a more refined final design, by its very nature, it will be somewhat crude and unpolished. Its my intension to catalog my attempts with this thread.  My oldest son Lives upstate and my youngest is in the army. I?d like to think I?ve passed along the tinkerers urge in them although they are too busy starting out and establishing themselves to demonstrate if it has stuck. Perhaps this and other follies I pass along on the web will inspire others whom I?ve never met. If so, good.  These are two more of my favorite quotes form Edison.

?If parents pass enthusiasm and creativity along to their children, they will leave them an estate of incalculable value....

?I have far more respect for the person with a single idea who gets there than for the person with a thousand ideas who does nothing....?

So even if I don?t succeed, it wont be for nothing and I will have surely learned something I can use in the future meaning it wont have been a wasted effort. After all, the joy is in the doing.


38
General Discussion / D&DH showing political bias
« on: June 18, 2012, 12:16:39 PM »
A once good outlet for deer hunting info has turned into a politically partisan web site. In recent months, D&DH editor (Dan Schmidt) seems to have gone out of his way to show his bias (and by extension the bias of D&DH since his is the defacto face and voice of D&DH, at least online) seems to have gone out of his way to poison WI hunters to the Wisconsin deer trustee even going so far as to advance and promote what was commonly known as liberal propaganda in the form of an opinion piece that D&DH hoped to pass off as legitimate news.

This D&DH bias and desire to attack Dr. Kroll and the other 2 PhD?s on the Deer Trustee team seems to stem from a protectionist standpoint. If one were to look at Dan Schmidt?s book Whitetail wisdom you would see the language he used to describe his mentors and what he deemed as the best whitetail minds in North America. He list among them retired WDNR (and father of SAK) Keith McCaffery.

Dr. Kroll has made no bones about his lack of faith in SAK (for some very good reasons) and I think Dr. Kroll represents a threat to the foundation Schmidt has built his set of values upon and Schmidt is lashing out with his tedious stories attacking Kroll and his team and his using the D&DH web site as a sort of bash fest for anything Kroll. I think Schmidt jumped the shark when promoted the liberal propaganda and BS about Kroll advocating privatizing public lands or making public lands a pay-for-play scenario. Anybody who was sincere and possessed even the most modest level of understanding of the governance of public lands in WI would have read this claims about Dr. Kroll and dismissed them as baseless prattle unless there was an agenda to do harm to Kroll and by extension, Governor Scott Walker.

I find it unfortunate that Dan Schmidt and D&DH either fell for this or knowingly advanced this BS for a political agenda. Dan Schmidt has used his position with D&DH to advance no less than 6 stories trying to poison the hunting public to the Deer trustee. Schmidt and D&DH are not alone in his constant lamenting about Kroll. Pat Durkin seems to delight in souring hunters to the Deer trustee. I don?t think this is a coincidence as the preface to Dan Schmidt?s book states the following:

To Pat Durkin: my mentor for more than 6 years. You not only taught me how to do it, you taught me how to do it right.

Both Durkin and Schmidt cant seem to speak any ill of Keith McCaffery and seem to be threatened by Dr. Kroll and his recommendations almost out of fear that Kroll will do some good and improve the situation in WI. I think a large part of this is their dislike of the current governor and his political party and especially in light of the recall and their desire to serve as propagandists prior to the recall election with hopes of steering hunters away from Scott Walker by advancing stories meant to harm both Kroll and Walker when the stories lacked credibility. Why then would Schmidt and others not do a little digging to find out the claims were baseless rather than simply advancing these stories. Schmidt even included on the D&DH pages a call from Democrat legislators which was clearly a partisan ploy driven solely by the recall.

It?s a shame a once proud and good deer hunting outlet like D&DH has allowed itself to become a tool of bias and partisan politics to the point that its less than tolerable to mainstream hunters. I think Schmidt does D&DH a disservice and alienates a large portion of its base by essentially becoming a political hack willing to sell out.

39
If you recall, last year the Conservation Congress went out of its way to push crossbows by manufacturing controversy to fill seats at the spring hearings. Well they have done it again. Its little wonder why people have stopped attending the spring hearings but here is another example of how their system devalues the citizens writing resolutions in such a way as to ask, Why bother dealing with the Conservation Congress?

Last year, a person submitted a resolution in Racine County seeking a lesser weapons change that would allow the use of a crossbow for gun deer season, for bear hunting and for turkey hunting but specifically stated in his resolution that the archery deer season was to remain unchanged. When citizens write a resolution, they do so with very specific wording. Here are the words the resolution writer used in his preamble:

Thus any hunter could use a rifle, shotgun, handgun, muzzleloader, crossbow or bow under the authority of a gun deer license and a class A bear license, A shotgun crossbow or bow could be used under the authority of a turkey license, And ONLY a bow could be used under the authority of an archery license unless the person meets the State of Wisconsin requirements of 65 years of age or has a class A,B, or C disabled permit for a crossbow.

He then wrote again in the resolution that:

only a bow could be used under the authority of an archery license unless the person meets the State of Wisconsin requirements of 65 years of age or has a class A,B, or C disabled permit for a crossbow.

The writer was very clear with his intentions. His resolution passed in his county so the public supported not changing the archery deer season. Because his resolution was supported it went to the Conservation Congress Legislative study committee. That committee met in August of 2011 and took up his resolution. Here are the meeting minutes from that committee meeting:

Resolution 520711  Lesser Weapon Option for Deer, Bear, Turkey .The resolution was read by ChairmanFahrney and opened up for discussion.

Discussion: Since each license has specific firearms  bow or cross bow requirements, this resolution would add the crossbow as an allowed weapon under the deer gun license, class A bear license & turkey license. Cross Bow is allowed if 65 years old or with the proper disabled hunter permit.

Motion by Allen Haase to advance the resolution; 2nd by Larry Meyer. Motion passed on a voice vote.

The committee honored the wishes and intent of the authors resolution and advanced it to the Conservation Congress Executive council which met on Jan 6 2012. The Executive Council knew the author intended to keep the bow season unchanged in regards to crossbows, They knew the Legislative Council honored the wishes of the writer but ignored his specific intent. Here are the meeting minutes for the resolution:

#28: 520711 Lesser weapon option for deer, bear and turkey. Motion made by Shook to advance; second by Wrolstad.
Miller: Opposes based on lessor weapon clause. Friendly amendments were made to go to a 55-age limit and drop the term lessor weapon. Motion carried.

Why do citizens bother to attend the spring hearings and carefully word resolutions if somebody within the congress can bastardize the resolution to change the intent of the author???? It was made clear last year with the manufacturing of crossbow questions that some on the Conservation Congress are hell bent to insert more crossbows into the archery deer season but to take the resolution of a citizen and change it to be something that person specifically worded against is out of line and further proof that citizens are wasting their time attending the spring hearings if this is the result.

What choice do bowhunters in WI have? You are once again faced with protecting the archery deer season from the Conservation Congress. On April 9th go to the conservation congress spring hearings and VOTE NO on question 62 which now reads as follows:

62. Would you support a legislative change that would allow anyone the use of a rifle, shotgun, handgun, muzzleloader, bow or crossbow under the authority of the Gun Deer License and Class A Bear License; allow anyone the use of a shotgun, bow or crossbow under the authority of a Turkey License; allow the use of a crossbow under the authority of an Archery License if the person is 55 years of age or older (currently 65) or has a class A, B, or C disabled permit??

If you are inclined to ever write a resolution your county, perhaps it should be required that you insert the following language into your resolution:

To the members of the Conservation Congress, DO NOT use my resolution for your own personal agenda, either advance my resolution as worded or reject it but you DO NOT have my permission to rewrite it and change it to be something opposite of what was written.

Remember, April 9th, attend your spring hearing and vote no but also tell those in attendance that the conservation congress ought not be modifying citizen resolutions to change the intent of the resolution simply because somebody within the congress likes crossbows.

Here is the author's original resolution


40
Archery / Wisconsin Bowhunters Convention vendors wanted
« on: January 26, 2012, 09:14:24 AM »
With the WBH convention fast approaching (March 2-4 in Stevens Point), invitations are being sent to hunting/outdoors related businesses that may want to have a vendor booth. If you know of an outdoor related business that you think would complement the vendor area, please let me know. You can PM the information to me or call me 262-490-2123

Here is a list of businesses that have been contacted thus far . If you have a contact to any of these businesses, please encourage them to be a convention vendor.

Hooyman saws

WI buck and bear club

Slumper seat treestand replacement seats
 
AMS bowfishing

Tru Fire releases

bruin bows

Rivers Edge Treestands

Stic-n-pic (trail camera systems)

Insane archery (bow mounted camera)

Archery impact systems

Docs custom arrows

The shadow shield

Cuddeback cameras

Heater Body Suit

Rinehart Targets

Mathews bows

Renegade archery

Lone Wolf treestands

Little Wolf Archery

Treestandup

hunt more chairs

oak sturdy

RER bows

Ski?s meat market

Monster Buck Magnet Mineral

Blackhawk archers

Ablers meats
 
Hammer bow hanger

Impact archery
 
Badger BBQ
 
Bear Scents, LLC

Blind Ambition Bale Blinds

Come Alive decoys

CUSTOM PIPE DESIGNS, LLC (Deer carts)
 
Dwyer Longbows, LLC

Forge Bow company

Slate river

Whitetail devotion

Turkey fan man

Fast Jack Treestand systems

Tree Hopper Treestand accessories

Field Logic

Shaggy Dog jerky Marinade

Northern Lites snowshoes

Bow Brothers

Hunting science (gum-o-flage)

Whitetail properties

Nolan sales llc

Bonehead Dans skulls

Hunt-n-bag

Downtown video archery

First shot archery
 
Cripple creek antler art
 
Terry Doughty, Wildlife Artist
 
Sam Timm wildlife artist

Central WI hunting land

Lewis Hunting Accessories MFG (bright eyes trail markers)

Jay trudell outdoor adventures

WI archery alliance

Pine creek antler baskets

The brisket buddy

Hunting beast

shooters choice archery products

Loomis outdoor products

HHA Sights

Mayes Taxidermy

Peoples Meat Market

SILENT SLIDE HUNTER'S SAFETY BELTS

Archers pro shop

Overdraw?n archery

Buck Country Products

41
With the WBH convention fast approaching (March 2-4 in Stevens Point), invitations are being sent to hunting/outdoors related businesses that may want to have a vendor booth. If you know of an outdoor related business that you think would complement the vendor area, please let me know. You can PM the information to me or call me 262-490-2123


42
Whitetail Deer / Rancid Crabtree 2011 blog
« on: September 18, 2011, 03:56:08 PM »
Sat. Morn Sept. 17. 34 Degrees, faint NE wind.

The alarm went off at 5:15. Its was cold enough that I wore longjohns and a stocking cap and used hand warmers. I was hunting the site I have been calling the crossroads site for my deer scent trials. Its been dry for the last few weeks so walking in quietly would be a challenge. When I got within 50 yards of the edge of the woods, I heard a deer busting through the underbrush but it was still dark so I could not see anything. When I got to my stand I hung my bow from the rope and then walked out in front of the stand and placed some of the homemade scent on the back side of a nearby tree and on some of the lower vegetation and then headed up into my ladder stand.

It was cold enough to see my breath which told me the wind was perfect for the direction I expected the deer to come from. I assumed they would be on a neighboring property eating acorns and then would filter back into the woods, cross the small stream and then into a beading area. That?s exactly what happened. At 7:02 I caught the flick of an ear in the distance.  I could see it was a doe. I grabbed the camera instead of the bow. The first video is her approach. She eventually gets down wind of the scent.
(You can improve the video quality on Youtube by selecting 720P HD at the bottom right of the viewing pane. Click on where it says 360p)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KyIElqyfALQ


At the end of the first video she had reached the scent and stops. The second part of the video is after she reaches the scent and starts sniffing and licking the vegetation. It would have been more than long enough to provide a shot but I was not interested in shooting this doe.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHeh_lcIM78

In the last video, she walks off unharmed and unaware that I was above her and that I opted to shoot her with a camera instead of my bow.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7AqraVTU38


At around 8:00, another doe approaches from just west of where the first doe was. This put her right in front  of my trail camera. I snapped a frame from the video and you can see the bungee cords that hold the trail camera on the tree.  



After hunting I pulled the card from the camera. Here is the picture it took as she passed by. Today?s technology is impressive. This doe was being photographed and videoed and she never knew what was going on.



I think she knows she is late getting back to bed and she seems in a hurry. She never gets down wind of the scent but instead passes by it from the up wind side and never stops moving. Both deer splash across the stream and head into a bedding area.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHf_ludZEU0

I hunt until 10:00 am and then head back to the farm.

When I got to my parent?s house I learned that my 11 year old Nephew had killed his first deer in the first hour of his first bow hunt.



I had posted a picture of him here back in 2008 at age 8 practicing with his bow.



This young fella and his siblings have been raised in a bowhunting family. Here is a picture of him and an archery kill his mom made while pregnant with their little sister.



After I got cleaned up, I headed to a small family get together.  At 3:30 I headed back to the woods to sit another stand. While approaching the spot, I rounded a corner on the field road and spotted a doe.





After a brief stare down, she walked away.

The wind was not the best and I should not have sat this stand but instead should have returned to the stand I used in the morning. The evening passed by with a brief sighting of a doe on the other side of the stream.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fr-WRA9f_k

At last light I heard a sound behind me and turned to see a spike buck 30 yards to my right rear. It was too dark in the cedars behind me to get a video. After he passed by, I climbed down and headed back to the truck.

The forecast for Sunday was rain with South Winds. Neither are very good for where I hoped to hunt so I slept in after waking to the sound of rainfall. I ate breakfast with my parents and then headed home. While no game was harvested, it was a great opening weekend. As I write this I became aware that I saw several adult does but none of than had fawns with them. Likewise I did not have very many pictures of fawns on the trail cameras either. This has me concerned.

43
I decided to try my hand at a homemade resin knife handle. This is commonly done with carbon fiber and fiberglass but I've also seen it done with denim so I thought I would give it a try. I've seen others do this with some pretty interesting results. I want a black handle and red handle so I?m making it out of an old pair of black dress pant that had a busted zipper and an old red T-shirt. I cut squares that were 4 ? by 4 ? so that I can get a matched set of handle scales.



This was messy work and I wore rubber gloves that quickly were covered in resin so not many pics were taken during the actual assembly of layers. I got the resin and hardener from Walmart.



I used a plastic bin to coat each square and a squeegee  to spread and saturate the cloth.



I would be clamping the stack between two wood slabs. I cut apart a large Ziploc bag and taped it to the blocks to keep them from sticking to the fabric squares.



16 layers thick. Notice how the Ziploc bag material is no longer smooth and tightly stretch over the block. This stuff gets really hot. I could not hold the mixing container due to the heat.



Then I clamped them together as tightly as I could. I also made a set of thinner pieces out of a red T-shirt. I will use them for spacers. They are only 2 layers thick.





I let them set for 24 hours even though the container said it would be cured in 2 ? .

After prying the blocks apart.



After sawing off the excess.



All that pressure did a good job of making a very solid and heavy chunk of resin impregnated cloth.



Here are the scales and spacers I cut for the knife.



I took a piece of scrap and rounded and polished it to see what the surface would look like without applying any kind of finish. I polished it on a flannel buffing wheel with Tripoli compound. It even looks a little like carbon fiber.



Since this is just an experiment , I am using one of the Chicago Cutlery factory 2nds I have on hand. I?m not sure what about them makes them 2nds but they sell them at a good price. This is just a basic kitchen knife and perfect for this sort of practice.



I used brass pins and my regular slow cure epoxy to attach the handle parts. I used a belt sander and palm sander to shape. I went from 50 grit to 400 grit sandpaper and then 000 steel wool and finally the flannel buffing wheel. Here is the finished handle made from a pair of pants and an old T-shirt.







Interesting patterns can be made by using different colored cloth layers. I plan to make another using blue jeans and some other colored fabric that my wife wont miss.

This method has applications beyond knife making and could be employed for making such things as side plate grips for your bow or hand gun, guitar fingerboards and bridges or any number of things.

44
Outdoor Related Craft Projects / homemade meat smoker project
« on: March 28, 2011, 07:45:01 PM »
My last homemade smoker lasted 15 years. It was a converted chest freezer I tipped on its side and it worked great for hot smoking but eventually rusted through because of the heat and moisture and salt inherent to the smoking process.

Being that I like to build things, I began building a new smoker from scratch. I searched online for big electric smokers to get a feel  for what?s available and to find something to pattern mine after (never been ashamed to steal a good idea) Most of the smokers were too small for what I want  but none of the big commercial units allowed for cold smoking. Part of the reason I want a new smoker is so I can smoke things like cheese, nuts, lox and other things that are cold smoked. Also the big commercial units cost around $4,000. I think the price is fair considering what you get but I would rather make my own.

This is an example of what out there.

http://store.cookshack.com/p-121-smartsmoker-oven-sm160.aspx

I like it but it cant be used to cold smoke and it has too few racks. My smoker will sit outside year round so it has to be weatherproof. Since most of the meat smoking I do is in the winter in temps below freezing, I will insulate the smoker with 1 ? thick foam board. I will use treated lumber for the legs since its going to sit outside year round. I will make it for hot smoking but will build a cold smoking adapter. I want ten racks and the extra height for smoking hot sticks and bacon sides. The inside smoking area I?m shooting for is 25? wide, 20? deep and 48? tall and will be lined with aliminum. Its going to have dual exhaust, and T-111 exterior siding and will be about 7 feet tall. The inner walls are going to be ? inch thick plywood.

The back wall



Fast forward to the completion of the structure. The upper opening is the smoking chamber. The lower is where the electric heating elements and pan filled with wood will go. each compartment will have its own door so I can add wood and adjust the heat without opening the upper area and letting all the heat out. The recessed areas are 1 ? inches deep and will be filled with pink foam board (R-7.5).







Here is the inner ceiling. I?m using 3 inch galvanized for the smoke stacks. I cut and bent tabs all the way around to attach it to the wood and to have a good seal.



Testing to see if it fits.



The space between the inner ceiling and the outer roof will be filled with insulation board. This was to test the fit to make sure I had the smoke stack holes in the right place.



I don?t have a sheet metal break for making the bends in the aluminum lining so I improvised.



The floor piece being tested for proper fit. My plan is to wrap all the exposed wood with aluminum. I will use aluminum nails to hold the aluminum lining in place to avoid rust.



The racks for smoking will be supported by 3/4 inch poplar dowels. They will be supported by the hard maple strips on each side. I drilled a 7/8 inch hole about halfway through the maple and then split each one on my table saw. Each strip will be able to support 5 dowels.





Once I finish lining the entire inside with aluminum, I will attach the maple rack supports. 

45
Whitetail Deer / Why the crossbow question is being asked again in April
« on: February 07, 2011, 11:48:21 AM »
In April, there will be a question on the spring hearing ballot that will be of interest to WI bowhunters and gun deer hunters. The question deals with allowing anyone holding a WI archery deer license to use a crossbow during the archery deer season. This not about crossbows but WHY the question is coming back (see the video link below) and to correct some bogus info printed in the papers. This question was asked in WI in 2005 and rejected by 70% of voters. It was rejected in 94% of WI counties. It was asked again by the DNR within the bowhunter mail-in survey they conduct every 4 years. Both times, the concept was rejected by the majority. If you read the recent Wisconsin outdoor news story you will remember a mention of the last DNR mail survey but they got the numbers wrong.

The paper listed the results of the DNR survey as 52% opposed and 48% in favor. This is of course an error. The results were 59% opposed and 41% in favor. The results are available on the DNR web site which makes me wonder why they would print false data that is easy to review. The crossbow question has been asked multiple time and the opinions are widely known but this thread is not so much about crossbows as it about WHY the question is being brought back again.

This thread is for information purposes meant to inform WI hunters on how we got here and why you should turn out on April 11. This story cant be told without explaining what happened and how and why but I DID NOT create this thread to bash anybody. To understand why the question is being asked again, view the you-tube video at this link.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHBDlrmkBEo

After viewing the video, you will realize that it was done to manufacture controversy to boost attendance. When this situation was created, there was some concern by those in the room. This is reflected in the meeting minutes (see the last page)

http://dnr.wi.gov/org/nrboard/congress/minutes/2010/Big%20Game%20Meeting%20Minutes.pdf

This is meant to inform, WI deer hunters of WHY the question is coming back another time. After reviewing the video, you will understand why the question is coming back and it has nothing to do with crossbows. It was done to manufacture controversy for the sake of boosting attendance at the hearings. For those planning to attend the hearings, here is a list of locations by county.

http://dnr.wi.gov/org/nrboard/congress/spring_hearings/2011/2011Locations.pdf




Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 13
Google
Web http://www.wisconsinoutdoor.com