sdkidaho

Not sure how long it would take, suppose it depends on their current work load. As for the clear poly stuff, not sure exactly what Tucker had in mind but I'd bet that some clear fingernail polish would do the trick, but I'd wait to see if Tucker confirms that or not. I know he likes a high gloss / buff job on his nails.

Dude! You're a lady killer for sure! But for heavens sake, get that girl a warmer hat!

I'd go with Option 1 and Option 3.

Nope, nothing wrong with that at all. There are several breeds that do well in both settings though, and it's all a matter of preference and how much time you spend with your hound I think. Great advice.

Pudel Pointer. Used in upland game hunting and waterfowl, point and retrieve. This dog will most likely cost you more than what a lab would, but were I to do it again I would have bought a PP. I currently have a German Shorthair, and he's great, but I worry about him retrieving in the cold water here in Idaho during waterfowl season. If cost is a concern then a lab probably is your best bet. Granted I don't know what a quality lab goes for, but around here labs are about half of what my GSP was.

I PM'd him a while back and I might have even tried to email him, can't remember. Never heard back from him.

Check this thread: http://www.benelliusa.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12149&highlight=pass+decoy

Full story found here: http://www.consumerfreedom.com/news_detail.cfm/headline/3212

Cool! Sounds like a great gun.

And how will you contact them? With a phone call! Not email. Not US Postal Service. Not Pony Express. Not by northern Tibetan Yak. Phone them.

Yeah, cuz I'm sure that Brownings camo covering is better than anyone elses. Oh yeah, one other thing that might interest you about a Browning Silver Hunter: I would call (not write or email) Benelli and let them take care of it. The stories we've seen here about Benellis Customer Service have been extremely promising. As for the camo problem, yeah, it sucks that it can ding/chip and wear off like it does but that's true of any manufacturer that produces guns with camo. That's the main reason I went with good ol'black.

To outlaw it would make it so they could not grow the crops for the express purpose of baiting in waterfowl. The reasons for this would be to make it so that everyone in an area has a fair chance at migrating birds, rather than just people with lots of money. Even if planting a field would only cost a couple of thousand dollars, and even if you split that up between ten guys to reduce the cost, it shouldn't come down to those that have the money have greater advantage over those who don't. I believe that is the concept that Tucker is trying to convey.

Was it real? Seemed like a "Saturday Night Live" type of sketch almost.

Actually Tim never was a Beretta guy. The video that you see of him shooting the Xtrema 2 was self made by Tim. He made that and sent it to Beretta hoping to get a job with them. Apparently at the time, Beretta wasn't looking to add any shooters to their team so they never took him on. Shortly there after he joined the Benelli team.

I'm just not very good with Photoshop. I can do a few easy things, but nothing fancy.

I never said the fish was a bass!! You could put it up somewhere, like youtube or some place like that and give us the link. And your method for making the arrow was much easier! I never said I knew how to use Photoshop very well, just that I have it. How do you get the arrow to point wherever?

Quantity. Ground that had a crop harvested is surely going to drop some of that harvest on the ground, but it's not going to be like a field that is left unharvested for the animals to come and have their fill. Sure, both could potentially draw birds in, but farm ground that was harvested isn't usually going to be flooded during waterfowl season and have standing water on it.

$1500? I thought you said you were getting the Xtrema without the KO system? That should be quite a bit less than $1500.

LOL - whatever you fishturd. I used Adobe Photoshop for those!!

The red arrow points to the buttom that allows you to type your response in this box: That one is so you don't have to do a full reply - when you have quick comments to make or whatever. Sorry to break up the posts. Apparently there is a new limit on how many pictures you can have in one post - two.

I guess I'm not really sure what it is you would ever attach to a post? Any info you want to put it you should link to, or just paste the text here, and pictures you just put in like I did the ones above, with the image tags. What is it you were trying to attach? Maybe knowing that I can better answer the question. When you first come to the forums you are on the main page with all of the categories: Benelli Waterfowling Turkey Hunting Big Game Hunting Etc. Once you click on one of those, you are now "in" that forum. Once you are in there, you can see this on the upper left hand side: Click that button and you are ready to post a new thread. Or once you are in a thread you can click one of these buttons to reply: The yellow arrow points to the button to start a full reply. The black arrow points to the button to reply to a post that you want to quote in your own thread. The blue arrow points to the button you can click if you want to quote several people. Meaning that if you want to quote four different people from one thread, you click that button on each of their posts and then click the button the yellow arrow is pointing to. Once you do that, all of those people's remarks are in your quote. You can look at my response to a thread to see what I'm talking about. Notice the multiple quotes in there from others.

With no desire to sound rude I would have to say... so? Anyone that buys a gun should go into it knowing they have to clean it from time to time. 20 minutes of cleaning versus 10 really isn't going to ruin my day if the performance in the field is what it should be.

So essentially it's that the guys with money are getting all the benefits and fun (this of course isn't a new concept in life). I definitely see your point of view. I understand why the others are doing it as well, because it makes them money when their constituents come to hunt their club, and or the land owners do it so that they don't have to compete on public lands with every other Tom, Dick and Harry. It does need to be a level playing field, though. Not sure how you would achieve that, but I'm sure there is some sort of middle ground. Hmm. Two wrongs don't make a right. If it's wrong in anyones opinion to do it, then even the "little guy" shouldn't do it, but I think that's the point Tucker is trying to make. As for dropping corn or feed out there at all, the biggest reason I can see to not do it is that it isn't natural. Wild animals that get handouts begin to expect those handouts and eventually can't survive without them. Don't believe me? Check out the National Elk Refuge that's over in Jackson Hole, Wyoming. Those elk survived for what, thousands of years or more before white men came to the valley and started feeding them? That herd wouldn't survive now without the current feeding program. The waterfowl that get fed, year after year, have learned where they can go to get a meal (at least the ones that survive from year to year have). That's the danger of constantly feeding (or should we say baiting) them. Undoubtedly they alter their path of migration, and whether or not it's detrimental to the species or a benefit is hard to say - I don't have that kind of data. Not according to the law. Baiting is when you place food that is not native to the environment or natural to the animal in question, in an area for the express purpose of luring said animal into that area for whatever purpose - whether to capture it, kill it, or observe it, or whatever. If I'm out in the woods and find Bambi munching on some grass, that has nothing to do with baiting him in, unless of course I went out and planted a nice plot of Kentucky Blue Grass for Bambi to enjoy and to draw him in. Therein lies the difference. Overall, it's a good argument. I see why both sides feel the way they do, and I'm sure that people that are for it probably have some good arguments as well (other than money I would hope). I can't say that I'm decided, one way or another, but I think I'd have to lean towards not baiting them in. I go out and hunt on public lands. This was my first season to waterfowl hunt and I was able to harvest a few ducks without baiting any in. I didn't call any in. I didn't use any decoys either. I walked through the river bottom and jumped a few ponds. Having done that I know that others can be successful without baiting the birds in. I have no problems with the use of decoys or calls, though each is certainly a form of baiting or would you call that tricking.