# Feeders on public land



## Utbuxhunter (Apr 24, 2018)

I’m not sure if anyone has encountered this issue, but it is something that just doesn’t seem sportsman-like or what hunting is about for me. The past two years there is a certain individual (whom I know) that has been cutting down several trees to hang his camera and tube feeder with corn as “scouting” for the deer hunt. When I say several trees, I mean more than 8 or 9. Not only does this have a lasting effect on our public forest lands, but it also leaves a pile of dead trees that just isn’t natural and is possibly a fire hazard. 

I actually have no problem with “baiting” for deer and have an attitude that hunting is like fishing, in that some people prefer fly fishing, while others prefer to throw out some power bait and wait for the bite. In essence to each his own. (So don’t turn this thread into a discussion about the ethics of baiting vs spot and stalk). However, hanging an unnatural feeder to a tree and destroying natural habitat on public land is extremely wrong, immoral and unethical in my book. 

I know many CWMUs and private land owners use feeders on their property and I don’t see that as a problem, even though their actions have impacted the natural migration patterns of the deer in certain units and areas. However, public land is owned by all of us and this intentional destruction of trees and habitat really bothers me...all for a deer?!?

I guess my questions are these:
1- Have any of you encountered similar situations?
2- Is the destruction of our public lands in this manner a crime or violation (I.E. should I report it and if so to whom?)?
3- Does anyone have a recommendation on what I should do since I know the individual and he has many other set-ups like this one...and continues this practice year over year? 

Thanks in advance for your input and consideration.


----------



## Lone_Hunter (Oct 25, 2017)

Call DWR and ask? Just leave leave out that you know a guy who's doing it when you ask, unless you really don't like the guy and want to throw him under a bus. 



I have to wonder though, isn't feeders something they do back east or down in Texas where there is no public land? My understanding is, that's just what they do back there. Makes me think the guy doing this, isn't from around here and is relatively new to Utah. I've seen salt blocks, and salt on the ground, but never a feeder. Never been on private land either, so what do I know?


----------



## 7mm Reloaded (Aug 25, 2015)

Might seem silly but for some reason it bugs me more to see junipers cut down then any other trees. Maybe because it takes a lifetime for them to grow back and probably because I've spent the majority of my life hunting in them. I know in national forest lands its illegal to cut live trees. a ranger got after us once cause someone ran over a baby quake. I agree this guy should stop and spend his time scouting and learn to hunt.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

Except for Christmas trees or logging with permits (and maybe grazing permits when livestock kills trees), it's illegal to cut down, remove or kill live trees on national public lands. The culprit needs be turned in or, at least warned that he will be turned in unless he stops!

FWIW, it's also illegal to plant new forage in national public lands, which includes apple trees and corn, so clean up after baiting.


----------



## taxidermist (Sep 11, 2007)

The damage to the tree has been done and nothing can "fix" that. However, the way the individual is going about setting up the cameras and bait (from the picts you have given) I'm sure isn't OK in the eyes of the Forest Service. 


I'd talk to the guy before sending in the "Tree Cops"


----------



## sheepassassin (Mar 23, 2018)

elkfromabove said:


> FWIW, it's also illegal to plant new forage in national public lands, which includes apple trees and corn, so clean up after baiting.


There's no way this guy can be accused of "planting" corn or apple trees. Not sure where you got that idea from.

Feeders aren't that effective around here, but they can be in the right scenario. It's funny to me to see guys get so bend out of shape over a guy cutting tree limbs to hang a camera, yet don't think twice when they are cutting out a place for a treestand, gathering fire wood for camp or when the forest circus burns an entire mountain range to the ground.


----------



## ns450f (Aug 28, 2018)

I am not sure if it's illegal to cut limbs from a live tree, but it is definitely illegal to cut down any tree on public lands without a permit. I was always told you can only cut wood that is dead and down. I would report the guy, why risk a confrontation with someone that has any chance of turning violent or bringing about negative feelings and drama towards yourself. Let the officials handle it. Last time I talked to a guy about his illegal behavior he attacked me and then called the cops and lied so I ended up with a charge instead of him and I had to deal with fighting it in the court and eventually getting it dropped. All that would have been avoided if I just let a leo deal with his illegal behavior. It sounds nice to "talk to the guy" instead of snitching him out but it just puts a risk on yourself.


----------



## sheepassassin (Mar 23, 2018)

Don’t be a cop caller. Just move on. This doesn’t impact anyone in any way. Lord knows we don’t have a shortage of cedar and juniper trees around here..:


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

Shocked that Shaun doesn't want the cops called for illegal behavior. 

(this is my surprised face...)


----------



## sheepassassin (Mar 23, 2018)

ya there’s all kinds of higher priority poachings and off road travel going on right now, but let’s waste the resources on baiting and cutting a few branches off a cedar to put a camera out. That’ll be a great use of an officers time


----------



## backcountry (May 19, 2016)

sheepassassin said:


> Feeders aren't that effective around here, but they can be in the right scenario. It's funny to me to see guys get so bend out of shape over a guy cutting tree limbs to hang a camera, yet don't think twice when they are cutting out a place for a treestand, gathering fire wood for camp or when the forest circus burns an entire mountain range to the ground.


Did you even read the OP's post?

The person isn't just cutting limbs but entire trees down, 8-9 according to the OP. Your comparisons make no sense in that light.

*****Edit: found a way to view photos. Only shows limbing not "cutting down" trees.

To the OP,

*****Edit: are they limbing trees or cutting them down?

I've seen huge baiting stations setup before but nothing with that sort of wanton destruction.

I say report them to the relevant agency. They should have an FPO or law enforcement officer to investigate the scene. They may or may not choose to confront the individual but at least it will be documented.

The other option is to meet with the person and chat with them. Self policing as a community can be very helpful but definitely consider any consequences for yourself in the relationship.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

Until the game and fish makes bating illegal then the only problem here is the cutting of trees and not cleaning it up. 

I knew a person once that would put corn out for grouse and then pop them in the head with his 22-250. Then if you went back up there the next spring you likely would find corn stalks sprouting in the area that he put the corn out in. They never did grow very tall but they were there. 

It is a lot like a person up on the Plateau that I have seen. Every year they park a camp trailer in a spot during the elk hunt and then when the deer hunt comes around they will place a broken up pumpkin across the road at a pond. Then when the deer show up for a drink or to taste some pumpkin they will pop one or two deer less than 50 yards away from their camp trailer. The only thing illegal about it is that they are shooting across a road.


----------



## 7mm Reloaded (Aug 25, 2015)

ya why try to save anything natural , As long as we're happy here in the moment right?


----------



## MWScott72 (May 23, 2011)

From what I see in these pics, the "offender" isn't doing anything more than trimming limbs to be able to place his equipment. This is no different than someone trimming out a place for his tree stand, cutting shooting lanes, etc, and this has already been mentioned. If this gent was actually cutting the entire tree, then it would be a whole different story, but the evidence in these photos just isn't there. I don't see that he is doing anything wrong or illegal, so let him do his thing the way he wants too.

Too many of us get hung up on "our way" as if it's the "only" and "right" way. Who cares if someone prefers to sit in a tree stand as opposed to spot and stalk? Both take time and effort...just in different ways. Why does it matter that someone drowns worms and another guy prefers artificials? Why does it matter that I prefer rifle or muzzy over archery at this point in my life? So long as we are all obeying the law, IT SHOULDN'T MATTER! There is enough out there to divide us a sportsmen, let's concentrate on what really matters and not cannibalize each other.

B/t/w - the only way you kill a cedar or PJ by cutting it down is to cut the trunk below the first lateral branch. All this fellow is doing is giving them a haircut.


----------



## backcountry (May 19, 2016)

MWScott,

I agree with the spirit of what you are saying but disagree on what the boundaries are. I'll assume from the photos that the offender is only limbing branches, not cutting down trees like was initially expressed. That could be legal but that's not the only issue. As hunters we are always emphasizing the ethic of conservation and it's history as related to wildlife and wildlands. Nothing about lopping trees simply to secure a metal feeding tube and cameras is in line with that approach. Bait stations can be used with almost no damage to the environment. Heck, a good hunter could place a canvas tarp below the feeding station and naturalize it with dirt, rock , etc within 15-20 minutes to prevent any possible invasive seeding. 

We are constantly challenged as stakeholders in any sport to do more than just be "legal". The more we self regulate the fewer laws and policies we are likely to see in the future dealing with the sort of damage (or worse ) this thread highlights. And our sport has a long history debating these issues and finding resolutions without government enforcement. I just see this as an extension of that process.


----------



## Hoopermat (Dec 17, 2010)

Instead of asking the people on this forum go ask a professional. 
Take your evidence and show the forest service or DWR office. 
Then if they deem it illegal then it’s out of your hands and off your mind. 

If you don’t then you will always wonder if you did the right thing. And the right thing is to take your stuff to a professional.


----------



## sheepassassin (Mar 23, 2018)

backcountry said:


> We are constantly challenged as stakeholders in any sport to do more than just be "legal". The more we self regulate the fewer laws and policies we are likely to see in the future dealing with the sort of damage (or worse ) this thread highlights. And our sport has a long history debating these issues and finding resolutions without government enforcement. I just see this as an extension of that process.


generally people that cry a a lot about certain things that bother them, are responsible for more stupid laws that happen all the time. baiting is legal. trimming branches is done by many. its altering a tree in some way. just like carving names, dates and initials in a tree, and we've all done that. wouldnt be surprised if there comes a time when that becomes a jail-able offense. anyways, i personally have more to worry about in my personal life than some guy putting up metal tubes of food and cutting branches. i kinda feel bad for the guys who dont have better things to do.


----------



## backcountry (May 19, 2016)

sheepassassin said:


> backcountry said:
> 
> 
> > We are constantly challenged as stakeholders in any sport to do more than just be "legal". The more we self regulate the fewer laws and policies we are likely to see in the future dealing with the sort of damage (or worse ) this thread highlights. And our sport has a long history debating these issues and finding resolutions without government enforcement. I just see this as an extension of that process.
> ...


We all have different values and lines. I know I personally tire of finding camps were the trees are obliterated of limbs anywhere close to arms reach. What we do on public lands has a big impact on others.

Fact is the OP isn't even reacting to the situation so much as asking for advice. I find that approach admirable. You've vocalized problems with that multiple times recently. So be it. I'd be torn on reporting this if just limbing trees but would have no problem reporting it if the guy was cutting down trees. But there is a certain point at which we start to see a "tragedy of the commons" when people keep pushing boundaries of what's acceptable practice, which I think this "offender" is playing real close to.

I don't feel sorry for anyone involved in this, myself. Seems like people are just hashing out the grey areas of our sport.

PS....not all of us have limbed living trees or carved initials into them. Most people I recreate with haven't as they do their best to practice Leave No Trace ethics.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

7MM RELOADED said:


> Might seem silly but for some reason it bugs me more to see junipers cut down then any other trees.


Kill all the junipers. They are the worst tree for range lands. They suck up the ground water and evaporate it out. Land drys out, allowing for more run off than absorption, native grasses die out.

Compare 1800's images to contemporary ones in the same outdoor regions. JPs were never as common place as they are now.

JPs are bad... look at before and after pictures of BLM chained areas. They recover quickly and look amazing with JPs gone.

-DallanC


----------



## Airborne (May 29, 2009)

DallanC said:


> Kill all the junipers. They are the worst tree for range lands. They suck up the ground water and evaporate it out. Land drys out, allowing for more run off than absorption, native grasses die out.
> 
> Compare 1800's images to contemporary ones in the same outdoor regions. JPs were never as common place as they are now.
> 
> ...


YES to Dallan!

Cutting down some JPs is generally a good thing. Hell...we pay folks to chain them off ranges! So many of our ranges would be much better off with less JPs. Fires used to take care of these.

Getting your panties in a knot over this doesn't make sense. As someone who loves being self righteous I get where the OP is coming from but I have to check myself quite regularly--I would advise the OP to do the same. Self realization is a wonderful thing.


----------



## ns450f (Aug 28, 2018)

One of the two trees pictured is a pinyon pine not a juniper


----------



## MWScott72 (May 23, 2011)

I realize this has gone over into the "ethics" side of things, and that, if I remember correctly, is what the OP hoped would not happen. He wanted advice on his specific situation, and after explanation, posted a couple pics as evidence to back up his claims. I had images of trees actually being felled, perhaps cleared, in order to make his bait stations. In actuality, if the photos are representative, he is doing nothing of the sort - just trimming some branches out of the way. Nothing wrong with that whatsoever.

I agree with Dallan - get rid of the PJs and cedars! They are invasives that have gobbled up land like Boss Hogg wolfs down chicken drumsticks. They have their place, but the damage they are causing to whole ecosystems is dramatic and well documented. If someone wanted to go out and remove some of them on their own volition, it wouldn't give me much heartburn. Heck, the reason the State and Feds don't do more (which we all know they would) is because the funds aren't there!


----------



## RoosterKiller (May 27, 2011)

You should put the gps cords on here. That would sure teach him a lesson.


----------



## KalebReese (Sep 5, 2016)

Wait wait wait. Baiting in Utah is LEGAL? Why on earth is that a thing?


----------



## sheepassassin (Mar 23, 2018)

KalebReese said:


> Wait wait wait. Baiting in Utah is LEGAL? Why on earth is that a thing?


Because this isn't California and we aren't run or governed by the libtard Democrats.


----------



## Utbuxhunter (Apr 24, 2018)

Thank you to everyone who provided constructive input and suggestions as to what to do regarding this situation. 

For further clarification:

In addition to severely trimming the trees for the tube feeder and camera, the person cuts down nearly a dozen (maybe more) trees in between to clear cut the area for his feed spots. The trees are cut at the base leaving just a stump sticking up. Many of the trees had bases in excess of 5 inches in diameter. The felled trees are then piled to dry out and waste, making an ugly mess and potential fire hazard. 

I did not take any photographs of the felled trees or stumps (but can do so next trip out), so please don’t form your full judgement based on the two pictures provided in the original post. 

Also, this is not the only feeder setup that he has out there like this. I am aware of at least 3 last year and knowing the individual, I am certain that there were many more. This year I am aware of 2 tube feeder setups in nearby areas to last year, and again suspect that he has more. If he were to continue this style of baiting (not to mention others following his example) into future years, I honestly don’t want to imagine the impact to our habitat (including bedding areas) and animals on public lands. These are areas that I have hunted for over 30 years and my ancestors hunted the same areas before me. I would like to think that as hunters we can sometimes consider the future impact of our actions and not just living for “today’s” pursuit of a trophy buck to post on social media, while destroying public lands in the process. 

In no way do I want to sound self-righteous and know that I am not perfect as a hunter or a human. I am just a concerned hunter asking for input from my peers and colleagues who enjoy this same passion. 

I don’t think this is a DWR issue (but I’m honestly not sure). I believe the clear cuts and feeders are in national forest land. Also, the person is very well known in the local area and contacting him directly would probably not go well.

Again, thanks to everyone for your consideration and constructive input.


----------



## sheepassassin (Mar 23, 2018)

Like previously stated, cedars and junipers are a plague that the state and fed agencies have spent a lot of money on to wipe out and create more productive habitats for the animals. Cutting these trees down isn’t a big deal. Having feeders out isn’t a big deal either. The area might be the same as your ancestors once hunted, but I promise the habitat and environment has changed a lot since then


----------



## backcountry (May 19, 2016)

Thx for the clarification, Utbuxhunter.

With that information I wholeheartedly recommend reporting the site and information to the relevant agency (USFS or BLM). Neither one allows unpermitted felling of trees and I don't believe either permits felling of live trees. 

Thanks for seeking input and wish you the best.


----------



## mtnrunner260 (Feb 15, 2010)

In addition to cutting the trees how does leaving the feeders up for over 14 days factor in on FS land?
I would provide some coordinates and your concerns to the district ranger for the area and they will have someone go investigate it.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

backcountry said:


> Thx for the clarification, Utbuxhunter.
> 
> With that information I wholeheartedly recommend reporting the site and information to the relevant agency (USFS or BLM). Neither one allows unpermitted felling of trees and I don't believe either permits felling of live trees.
> 
> Thanks for seeking input and wish you the best.


"cedar", I mean juniper post are cut from live trees.

Utbuxhunter, there really isn't much of a fire hazard from what your describing. What's the biggest fire hazard is an overgrown forest.


----------



## MWScott72 (May 23, 2011)

To the OP. A picture says a thousand words. What you originally said was not backed up by the photos that you posted. Therein is the rub. I would agree with others that if you think there is an issue, report it. But again PJs are invasive, and cutting a few each year probably does more good than harm. I certainly wouldn't get worked up over it. Your ancestors probably hunted the area when the PJs weren't there!

The bigger issue might be the feeders, but then again, is there a law against putting them out on BLM or USFS property? I don't think so.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

ridgetop said:


> "cedar", I mean juniper post are cut from live trees.


To legally cut juniper post for fencing or whatever you need a permit to do so. You can't just go and start cutting them when you feel like.


----------



## backcountry (May 19, 2016)

ridgetop said:


> backcountry said:
> 
> 
> > Thx for the clarification, Utbuxhunter.
> ...


Thx for correcting my error.


----------



## backcountry (May 19, 2016)

MWScott72 said:


> To the OP. A picture says a thousand words. What you originally said was not backed up by the photos that you posted. Therein is the rub. I would agree with others that if you think there is an issue, report it. But again PJs are invasive, and cutting a few each year probably does more good than harm. I certainly wouldn't get worked up over it. Your ancestors probably hunted the area when the PJs weren't there!
> 
> The bigger issue might be the feeders, but then again, is there a law against putting them out on BLM or USFS property? I don't think so.


You keep calling pinyons and junipers invasive. Are you using a non-ecological definition or could you provide some scientific evidence to support your use of the ecological definition of invasive? I ask as the commonly accepted biological and ecological definitions of "invasive" are contingent on the species not being native and juniper is native to Utah.

(PS...fully recognize their numbers are historically high at the moment and crowding out other species key to game)


----------



## 7mm Reloaded (Aug 25, 2015)

The Junipers and pinyons up around Duchesne and places in central Utah are hundred of years old . Invasive species I think not.


----------



## taxidermist (Sep 11, 2007)

I love junipers! Cut many of them as a kid for fencing on the farm. Sucker will tare up a chain on a saw in a hurry though. Full of sand from wind blowing as they grow.


----------



## MWScott72 (May 23, 2011)

Backcountry-
They are invasive in that they are now places that they were never present due to fire suppression. All one has to do is look at historical photographs to see how PJs and cedars have now encroached upon or "invaded" areas where they were never present before. I fully understand that they are native; however their explosion due to fire suppression, and loss in biodiversity as a result, is fully our doing and not mother nature's.


----------



## sheepassassin (Mar 23, 2018)

It’s amazing how whiny and b!tchy the hunting community in Utah has become.


----------



## ns450f (Aug 28, 2018)

I keep reading the term pj's like it is one kind of tree. Pj's stands for pinyon and juniper which grow together in lots of areas and neither of them are invasive. Pinyon trees have cones and pine nuts. Junipers have little blue berries.


----------



## mtnrunner260 (Feb 15, 2010)

Not to derail this any further but hopefully the OP will contact the agency who manages the land the feeders are on. Even if nothing illegal I'm sure they'd appreciate the info. 
Back to the derailing 
Pinyon pine and Utah Juniper are not invasive but they are invaders due to multiple factors as mentioned. 
Apologies in advance but here are some facts to ruin a good internet argument 
https://extension.usu.edu/rangeplants/shrubs-and-trees/JuniperUtah


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

ns450f said:


> I keep reading the term pj's like it is one kind of tree. Pj's stands for pinyon and juniper which grow together in lots of areas and neither of them are invasive. Pinyon trees have cones and pine nuts. Junipers have little blue berries.


I love blueberries.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

wyogoob said:


> I love blueberries.


You can eat these "blueberries" (They're sold and used as a spice, mostly in Europe.), but I'm not sure anybody but you would want to make a pie or jam out of them because they are pretty tangy and pithy and are mostly hard seeds. Let us know how that works out! :grin:


----------



## backcountry (May 19, 2016)

MWScott72 said:


> Backcountry-
> They are invasive in that they are now places that they were never present due to fire suppression. All one has to do is look at historical photographs to see how PJs and cedars have now encroached upon or "invaded" areas where they were never present before. I fully understand that they are native; however their explosion due to fire suppression, and loss in biodiversity as a result, is fully our doing and not mother nature's.


Appreciate your response. This helped me have some conversations today with friends of mine who are biologist. None of them are range specialist but all of them are dealing with the anthropogenic influences on species range expansion in some fashion in their work.

From that, "invasive" is a word being used more flexibly in some of the biological fields but there is also criticism of that newer usage out of concerns for how it might be applied outside the context of literature.

You definitely understand the nuance of the newer use and seem to have a strong understanding of the broader implications of how the "recent" range expansion and densities affect our various ecosystems. I worry though when I see it so broadly applied to all junipers like we are seeing in this thread. As that is not the context of the recent usage of invasive for those trees. Invasive only applies to explicit areas it's starting to colonize or encroach into.

Back to the subject of the OP...if we knew this was just a single, completely isolated situation than I don't think most of us would be too concerned. But when a community begins accepting such behavior broadly then we do have a problem. That's why we have generic ethics as a sport. They help us avoid butting up against law enforcement, new legislation/regulation and/or tension with other stakeholders. Not to mention, agencies and specialist spend years researching which areas to treat and how to apply that treatment for justified reasons, well beyond budget constraints.

As importantly, this particular incident plays right into to tensions with anti-hunters. It seems most of us are likely supportive of chaining and active management of PJ forest in some fashion to create better winter range. Problem is, anti-hunters and many other conservationist aren't (see recent GSENM controversy). And when they see behavior like this particular incident, and trust me they see this stuff, it becomes ammo against us. That gets worse when they can point to a community that tacitly supports such illegal activity.

At the end of the day we all get to decide what to do in situations like this. I just recommend buyer beware. The consequences of individuals doing this and community members vocally supporting it are broader and more public than most of us realize.


----------



## Airborne (May 29, 2009)

backcountry said:


> Appreciate your response. This helped me have some conversations today with friends of mine who are biologist. None of them are range specialist but all of them are dealing with the anthropogenic influences on species range expansion in some fashion in their work.
> 
> From that, "invasive" is a word being used more flexibly in some of the biological fields but there is also criticism of that newer usage out of concerns for how it might be applied outside the context of literature.
> 
> ...


I bet you are really fun at parties :grin:


----------



## backcountry (May 19, 2016)

Airborne said:


> I bet you are really fun at parties


Depends on the party &#128513;


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

backcountry said:


> Depends on the party &#128513;


Essential oil parties! They are the best.


----------



## MWScott72 (May 23, 2011)

MadHunter said:


> backcountry said:
> 
> 
> > Depends on the party &#128513;
> ...


All the good lookin ladies love'em &#128578;


----------



## backcountry (May 19, 2016)

MadHunter said:


> backcountry said:
> 
> 
> > Depends on the party &#128513;
> ...


Well played.

Sigh of relief I avoided that destiny. My wife would prefer to save such $ for camping.

Except for homemade poo-pourri ... that's worth every dime. And it saves marriage's.


----------



## ns450f (Aug 28, 2018)

backcountry said:


> MWScott72 said:
> 
> 
> > Backcountry-
> ...


Couldn't have said it better


----------



## High Desert Elk (Aug 21, 2012)

Do clearing shooting lanes and hanging treestands count in this discussion? Asking for a friend.


----------



## MWScott72 (May 23, 2011)

High Desert Elk said:


> Do clearing shooting lanes and hanging treestands count in this discussion? Asking for a friend.


Getting worked up about that would seem a bit over the top to me.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

Cutting a few branches to get a clear shot would be one thing, cutting down trees would be something else.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

Critter said:


> Cutting a few branches to get a clear shot would be one thing, cutting down trees would be something else.


Well, at least somebody gets it! IF YOU KILL A TREE ON PUBLIC LANDS WITHOUT A PERMIT OR PERMISSION, (logging, Christmas trees, etc.) YOU'VE BROKEN THE LAW, NO MATTER HOW YOU DO IT!


----------



## colorcountrygunner (Oct 6, 2009)

sheepassassin said:


> It's amazing how whiny and b!tchy the hunting community in Utah has become.


Irony.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

colorcountrygunner said:


> Irony.


Truth.


----------



## sheepassassin (Mar 23, 2018)

colorcountrygunner said:


> Irony.


You'd be hard pressed to find a post where I bitched about something as stupid as cutting branches off a cedar tree. But you on the other hand...


----------



## colorcountrygunner (Oct 6, 2009)

sheepassassin said:


> You'd be hard pressed to find a post where I bitched about something as stupid as cutting branches off a cedar tree. But you on the other hand...


It's the frequency of your bitching that is impressive.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

I guess “stupid,” much like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.


----------



## KalebReese (Sep 5, 2016)

colorcountrygunner said:


> sheepassassin said:
> 
> 
> > You'd be hard pressed to find a post where I bitched about something as stupid as cutting branches off a cedar tree. But you on the other hand...
> ...


#Burn


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

It would have helped a lot if the O.P. would have posted pictures of all the cut down trees.
It's like someone complaining about people driving atv's off road and then posting a picture of an atv parked in the grass 3 feet off the road.


----------

