doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Report from the North Country

Yes, it is my kind of place. Full of clean lakes with far, far better fishing than pretty much anywhere else, and plenty of public land to hunt.

Exactly my kind of place. I’d tell you to look into it, but, you know, stupid folks still end up dead there from time to time.

Best,
Ted



_______________________________________________________________________________________________
They should stay in Iowa, and pick up all the dead birds under the windmills.

Obviously some get lucky. After all you are still here.

Of course, you don't stray far from your little perch on the edge of Minneapolis, your favorite city.

I'll go bird hunting tomorrow while you sit there in your mother's basement, pounding away on your keyboard.

You are one weird, sick dude.

Enjoy the bugs, and the sweaty boots. I usually wait until after a hard frost, and prefer a bit less cabbage on the trees. The added benefit is the amateurs (looking at you) throw in the towel around then.

Club bicycle ride tomorrow afternoon. Meeting a bud for coffee on the motorcycles in the morning prior to that. Will be a perfect day for both. Not quite as one dimensional as you, but then, I’m not from Iowa.


Best,
Ted

______________________________________________________
I’ll bet the measured cumulative IQ in Iowa takes a hit when you go back to visit.

Yes, I'm telling you exactly that. I saw this happen here when coyotes moved into this area. I don't know what goes on in the western and central parts of the country, but I do here. Your head is stuffed so full of yourself that you cannot imagine anyone that wasn't taught the same stuff you were being able to understand relationships between animal species. News flash . . . . everything that's known about wildlife interactions didn't come from classroom lectures. When I did longline predator trapping in the late 70's and early 80's I saw the rapid decline in red fox populations as the coyotes moved in.

I've seen greys way up in persimmon trees at night, balancing on a limb like a 'coon. They are more woodland and brush canines than reds, who prefer open areas with little cover. Coyotes can run down a red and kill it much easier than they can a grey, which will duck into dense cover and evade the much larger coyote.

Rather than diss everything I, and others here, say you would do better to read up a little on the interactions between these canines. There is no shortage of data proving the things i saw and know to be true . . . . HERE. How red fox and coyote can co-exist in areas of very open terrain i cannot say. After seeing what i've seen, and reading what i've subsequently read, I have doubts that they do., despite the "learned professor's" claims.

The telling thing about you is your ego. It has shown itself many times here, one notable example being the instance I cited earlier about you claiming to have seen the first coyote that set foot on the 310 sq. mile Savannah River Site. You back up on your original claim now by qualifying it with your latest attempt at regaining credence . . . . "Doubtful that we were the first to actually see one given the number of cars driving by amd something like 23k people turning over at every shift change. And, if course they were known to be in the larger, general region." Before you start ridiculing other's observations you might consider recalling that most of your work at SRS seems to have been on rodents and Bachman's Sparrows. You claimed to prefer to study smaller mammals because . . . "they're just plain cute".Yes, I do know that sparrows aren't mammals, just quoting you and your research.

"Brent J Danielson

Position
Professor Emeritus
The work in my lab roughly concerns the overlap of three fundamental components of any ecological system, Behavior, Interactions between species, and Spatio-temporal Environmental Structure.

The interplay between these factors determine the dynamics, longevity, and diversity of the system. In general, I prefer to focus on small mammals as they are ubiquitous, energetic, and just plain cute. Their roles in shaping the rest of any ecosystem are likely to be large but poorly understood."

"Talk to google about punctuation and spelling. I can't be bothered"

You should have saved yourself time and just written that. It says it all. Including Stan's assessment of your ego.

Will you be donning the g@y apparel?


____________________________
Cargo shorts, shop rag t- shirt and boonie hat.

I don’t look good in Lycra.

Best,
Ted

_________________________________________________
Neither do you.

lloyd...looks like birds aplenty this year...

do you hunt with doggies?

Best,
Ted

ClapperZapper pretty much has provided the answer to low and declining grouse populations, but unfortunately, he isn't really recognizing or acknowledging it... much like the Nutty Professor and most of our Game Management biologists.

There are a multitude of factors that reduce grouse populations, ranging from poor nesting conditions, nest predation, disease, habitat loss, excess hunting pressure, extreme weather, and of course, highly efficient predators like hawks and coyotes.

When telemetry studies show that at least half of adult grouse are killed by avian predators, that should set off alarm bells and whistles. Add to that huge mortality the numbers killed by coyotes, foxes, cats, and other predators, and it doesn't take a genius to understand that a tipping point has been reached... in spite of grouse habitat improvements and lower overall hunter numbers.

Unfortunately, many State Game Management programs are being managed by biologists with a similar myopic mindset as the Nutty Professor. Even with the obvious clues right in front of them, they are too short-sighted to even consider that maybe it's time to go back to something that worked very well in the past. And that simple solution is reducing the number of predators. State Game agencies used to allow killing of hawks and owls, and many even paid bounties on them. They did not become extinct, but some populations of them became endangered. Now the pendulum has swung much too far the other way, but game dept. biologists, and fools like the Nutty Professor, still wish to treat them like some sacred cow that is untouchable.

We simply don't have any truly wild and self balancing ecosystems. That is a pipe dream of tree hugging environmentalist wackos. We hunters pay billions for our Fish and Game Departments to strike a balance and manage the game resources for the benefit of hunters and the general population too. All too often, they get it wrong, and the proof is in the pudding. Here in Pennsylvania, we saw such mismanagement played out when our Game Commission decided to allow harvesting of hen pheasants. When that massive impact was added to every other source of pheasant mortality, it was only a few years before our numbers of pheasants that bred clutches in the wild went to practically nothing. Then the few remaining birds were hammered by predators, and we are at a point where shooting stocked pheasants is about all that's left.

Cause and effect couldn't be more evident, but to this day, our Game Commission and their vaunted biologists refuse to admit they were wrong, and reverse that policy state wide.

And meanwhile, dummies like the Nutty Professor will continue to spout off about how many umpteen-thousand steps they accumulate on their Step Counter Apps, while shooting few if any birds. And they remain too dense to connect the dots. But you just can't fix stupid.