Coach

Yep, I'm busted - I figured we were looking for the deer in the middle of the pic - or what sure looks like a deer bedded in the fall-down. Looks like an ear and eye are plainly visible. Never saw the coyote until I knew it was there.

Dang - what a waste...that is just terrible.

IMO, the Knight Long Range Hunter is at the top of its class. I've seen this gun shoot groups at 350-450 yards that would compare with a lot of center-fire rifles. Good to see that they are still being made. I've got the Knight Long Rang Hunter with the Luepold Ultimate Slam scope. With practice, that combination is very effective.

IMO, Knight built some of the best inline muzzle-loaders ever. Unfortunately, they are out of business now so you can only buy them used. They used a good trigger and Green Mountain barrells. If you can pick one up used, I highly recommend them. Shot a coues last year at around 250 yards with a Knight and it was like shooting a center fire.

Dang, hoghntr, sorry to hear about the medical issues. This is a solid product and I'll be watching it closely. I hope you get the chance to hunt more despite the hip problems.

Dang Chef, I was trying to get several pairs of sore feet back to camp, but I saw that big sticker and wanted to come say hello - sure wish I would have. That's a nice Taco, BTW, and a really nice looking family. Glad you were up there. We camped out neer Sheep Corral off the 117, fished Big Lake, did the Baldy hike, checked some salt licks, played a lot of "corn-hole" and whiffle ball when it wasn't raining. I'm kicking myself for not just stopping and introducing myself. Glad you had a nice time up there, we did too. Vowell, that hike is always so much fun. We saw lots of trees that hat recently been scraped down by a bear up on top - maybe the same bear??? We'll be doing it again in a couple weeks but this time going up 94 and down 95, or vice-versa. Got some ashes to spread and good-byes to be said.

Saw you yesterday after we hiked the Baldy trail. Liked the sticker and a nice taco with matching camper shell. You were going in as we were leaving - blue Ford Expedition. Gave you a wave.

Nice blind. My boys and I have shot lots of critters out of one just like it including several turkeys and a nice velvet coues. One of the best investments I ever made. If the price gets rediculously low, I'd love to a have second. I think I paid around $400 new for mine. I wish they had never put that zipper there in the first place...nobody uses it. IMO, that's the only design flaw with that generation of blind, but if you do what most of us do, just keep it zipped up and do the lift/crawl method, it's one of the best ways to hunt. I watched 12 legal bucks walk inside 16 yards from one of these blinds a couple years ago. Shot number 13. IMO, no better blind on the market.

LOL

Thanks for the replies. I've been in contact with Christian and think he's got a super solid product (range snap) - and priced right. Now, I'm kicking myself for not buying the badlands pack last year when it was resonable. $60-$70 bucks seemed a little high for just a binocular holder. Now $130??? Sorry, not THAT good. Maybe it's time they have them made in Korea - or here's an idea, the US? One pouch, some straps, a couple magnets, we could make those, sorry didn't want to get political on this one. My buddy is a badlands distributor. Maybe he has one of the "pre-$70 magnet" models I can pick up.

Wow, Jed. Nice bulls. Bill flashed me that silhouette shot at the end of our all-stars game today in Eager on his phone. Looks like they're growing really nicely considering the lack of rain so far.

I think I see it, but maybe I'm wrong.

Wow - just wow...

Dang, probably would have bought the single six but just ordered a single ten.

Found this one on Gunbroker. This is the exact same one I have. http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=293579240 Not sure if the price is good/bad, but it's pretty rare to find an unfired '89.

Bump for a good rest. Just my opinion, I think this is one of the best rests on the market. Got one just like it on my bow and wouldn't trade it for another.

Wow, incredible buck, and some great taxidermy. That's my kind of art right there.

Wow, super video. Those are some amazing bulls!!! Great job!

+1, best way make a cup of coffee when keeping things light. Heck, I use them at home when I don't want to make whole pot, and I typically hate instant coffee.

Wow, that was cool. Nice job!!!

He had great taste in guns. I would love to see some pix.

Becker, I agree 100% that the trophy deer we're seeing in 3A/3C are not the result of good management, but the natural result of the the fires. And that's why I think Unit 1 and 27 will rebound so well in the upcoming years. I'm not slamming AZGFD, they do what they can, but natural conditions create good deer habitat, not government. That said, we have an amazing opportunity to bring back the kind of hunting some of us remember, through good management. Personally, I'd like to see some antler restrictions. I may not be the most popular guy for saying this, but seeing a velvet spike or two point hanging in camp is not going to help some of our trophy quality areas reach their potential. 3A/3C in the aftermath of the Rodeo/Chedeski fires produced some of the best elk, turkey, bear and deer hunting this state has seen. Basically written off as a moonscape, these units have produced almost as many 180-220" mule deer as the strip has. I've seen photos of a 12 year-old girl sitting behing a 212" muley, and others of some of the "missed bucks" that are right up with the big ones coming from North of the canyon in 12AW, 13A and B. One of our sponsors has photos of his youth hunters behind some giant bucks. Just imagine Unit 1 and 27 rebounding like 3A/C because of the fires. We just might see deer hunting come back in this state close to what it was years ago, and maybe even better.

Maybe an FN Five-Seven as part of a trade???

Jimmer, that was a very good post. Good thoughts and reasoning. However, at what point does the Federal Government become responsible for our health care choices? A good argument could be made for the point at which an ER could/could not turn any patient away. On the surface, it seems like a good idea - I mean, if you've got a serious injury, for example, you are bleeding to death and show up at the ER, should you be denied care until someone proves you can pay for the services you need to save your life? At the same time, suppose you are homeless and starving. You can't just walk into Safeway or Basha's or WalMart, load up your cart with food and walk out, and claim you have a right to the food in your cart because it it necessary to your survival. That would NEVER stand up in court. So does the demand for medical treatment, even when the injury or affliction is not life-threatening, and usually self-inflicted, require John Q. Public to open his wallet once again, fall under some sort of "basic rights" assessment? Personally, I am tired of getting hammered by doctors that can't collect enough from my exhorbant health care contributions every single paycheck, that they send me bills for the "gap" that my expensive insurance doesn't pay, to get in line behind the ACCCS drains that can't even remember where their kids came from, let alone take care of them. Those human pez-dispensers never pay a dime, whether it's vitamins or prescriptions, or trips to the ER for a sniffle. Yeah, I'm ranting now and on a bit of tirade, but I've had it up to my neck with these liberal, "progressive", socio-economic policies that reward the the leeches and hand the bill over to those actually trying to make a modest living.

I've been watching this topic on several forums today. Personally, I think it was a death blow by the "progressives". However, some sharp minds have also pointed out how this could blow up in Obama's face. For one, it places severe limitations on the Commerce Clause. Roberts actually ruled this law unconstitional under the rules of the Commerce Clause, but ruled it constitutional as the government's right to tax. Obama has clearly stated all along that this is NOT a tax - but the SCOTUS just said it is a tax. Secondly, since a huge part of Obama's platform to get elected was that he would not impose ANY new taxes on the middle class, this ruling just proved that he imposed the single largest tax increase on the middle class America has ever seen. So, while I believe we just got screwed, a lot of doors just opened up to use this lost battle to eventually win the war. Romney just got handed the noose to put around Obama's neck. It's time to see if he's got the balls to follow through. BTW, this SCOTUS decision does not mean zero-Care can't be repealed. If played correctly, this law can be repealed AND have the added benefits of putting huge limitations on the Commerce Clause. That would be a huge win, but I'm being cautiously opptomistic. On the other hand, this might have just made individual health care a caustic drain on our national economy that makes social security and medicare look like chump change.