Hunting and the Wildlife Overpopulation Myth

[DarkLion]

I am unable to find any truth at all in your post. You sound like one of those "nature lovers" who would faint if their feet ever ventured beyond concrete and asphalt and get all your facts from the cartoon channel. Bambi wasn't a real deer. Get over it.

Yet I don't see you attempting to disprove a bit of it. XXXXX. What exactly was untrue about his post?

By the way, real animals are far more enthralling than cartoons.

 

[DarkLion]

I have been saying for years that hunters do not "love" nature, they love a false nature manipulated to serve their means.

Farmers manipulate nature to serve their needs.


Since you don't hunt, I presume 100% of your food comes from farming.

Unless you go around gathering berries and nuts in the woods all day long. In which case you should be ashamed at taking the deers' food.

Is that an affirmation of my statement?

 

[dilloduck]

If humans truly love nature, how do they act towards it ?

 

[editec]

Mankind has been manipulating "nature" to increase his HUNT since before civilization.

 

[dilloduck]

Mankind has been manipulating "nature" to increase his HUNT since before civilization.

so does that mean he hates nature ?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

States will authorize clear cutting in order to make money on hunting licenses?

Yes, but actually more money is made on taxes on ammo for non-hunting uses.

I myself have heard of female lions absorbing embryos when they cannot find adequate hunting. Malnourishment seems to cause it, though I have never read a scientific text on it so I don't even know if it really happens.

There was a years-long study done on an island off Canada that showed that during years when there was little browse for the ungulates, they didn't reproduce at the same high rate as when there was plenty of food. The amazing things was that the wolves also had fewer young.

The winter starvation of deer defense of hunting completely ignores that "management" causes overpopulation. Not to mention that deer make up only about 5% of the animals hunted.

so does that mean he hates nature ?

Humans should be a part of nature but most of us live in cities now and the closest we get to animals are those on our plates or those we work to exterminate.

Most people are afraid of the natural world because they are ignorant of it.

 

[Montrovant]

States will authorize clear cutting in order to make money on hunting licenses?

Yes, but actually more money is made on taxes on ammo for non-hunting uses.

I myself have heard of female lions absorbing embryos when they cannot find adequate hunting. Malnourishment seems to cause it, though I have never read a scientific text on it so I don't even know if it really happens.

There was a years-long study done on an island off Canada that showed that during years when there was little browse for the ungulates, they didn't reproduce at the same high rate as when there was plenty of food. The amazing things was that the wolves also had fewer young.

The winter starvation of deer defense of hunting completely ignores that "management" causes overpopulation. Not to mention that deer make up only about 5% of the animals hunted.

so does that mean he hates nature ?

Humans should be a part of nature but most of us live in cities now and the closest we get to animals are those on our plates or those we work to exterminate.

Most people are afraid of the natural world because they are ignorant of it.

The 'natural' world is dirty and full of bugs. I prefer the 'unnatural' human world.

Of course, that means I'm no hunter, either.

 

[daveman]

I am unable to find any truth at all in your post. You sound like one of those "nature lovers" who would faint if their feet ever ventured beyond concrete and asphalt and get all your facts from the cartoon channel. Bambi wasn't a real deer. Get over it.

Yet I don't see you attempting to disprove a bit of it. Rather, you go on the attack. What exactly was untrue about his post?

By the way, real animals are far more enthralling than cartoons.

Indeed they are. I see many, many deer every week in the course of my job.

The problem is there are too damn many of them, even with hunting.

Kentucky State Police: Deer / Automobile Collisions

"The Insurance Information Institute estimates that there are more than 1.6 million deer-vehicle collisions each year, resulting in 150 occupant deaths, tens of thousands of injuries and over $3.6 billion in vehicle damage. An additional billion dollars is spent on medical payments for injuries to people in the car and out-of-pocket expenses paid by vehicle owners, bringing the total cost to approximately $4.6 billion. The average claim for deer-vehicle collisions is $3,000, with costs varying depending on the type of vehicle and severity of the damage." (quoted from (III - Warning to Motorists: Fall Is Peak Season for Deer-Vehicle Collisions)​

What's more valuable to you: 150 humans killed and tens of thousand injured, or some deer?

 

[Missourian]

From one of the bluest of blue states...Maryland:

Deer Hunting: An Effective Management Tool

The Maryland Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is responsible for the conservation and management of the state's native white-tailed deer population. The department's primary deer conservation goals are to ensure the well being of the species and its habitat while maintaining populations at levels compatible with human activity, land use and natural communities.​

Hunting remains the primary method for maintaining deer populations at appropriate levels, both in Maryland and throughout North America, despite vocal and visible protests of animal rights organizations.
​

Deer Hunting: An Effective Management Tool - Wildlife and Heritage Service - Maryland Department of Natural Resources

​

 

[Missourian]

You have obviously never hunted.

Thank god no, and if I had I certainly wouldn't admit it. I'd be too ashamed.

Are you a strict vegan?

I mean strict...no fish, nothing that contains or uses animal byproducts.

If not, you hunt by proxy.

You should be ashamed to hunt by proxy then proclaim that you would be ashamed to admit it.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

You have obviously never hunted.

Thank god no, and if I had I certainly wouldn't admit it. I'd be too ashamed.

Are you a strict vegan?

I mean strict...no fish, nothing that contains or uses animal byproducts.

If not, you hunt by proxy.

You should be ashamed to hunt by proxy then proclaim that you would be ashamed to admit it.

I wouldn't consider the slaughter of domestic animals to be "hunting". Hunting is a far more fair and natural way to obtain meat for food than farming. The animal gets to live in its natural habitat until it is harvested. Ever seen a big corporate cattle ranch?

 

[Intense]

Cars and deer can be a lethal combination. An increase in urban sprawl and more roads being built through wildlife habitats have displaced deer from their natural habitat, leading to a rise in deer-vehicle collisions, according to the Insurance Information Institute (I.I.I)

Deer migration and mating season generally runs from October through December, and causes a dramatic increase in the movement of the deer population. As a result, more deer-vehicle collisions occur in this period than at any other time of year, so drivers need to be especially vigilant.

An estimated 1.23 million deer-vehicle collisions occurred in the U.S. between July 1, 2011 and June 30, 2012, costing more than $4 billion in vehicle damage, according to State Farm, the nation’s leading auto insurer.

Damage caused by an accident with deer or other animals is covered under the optional comprehensive portion (not the collision portion) of an automobile insurance policy. Comprehensive auto insurance includes coverage for: fire, theft, vandalism or malicious damage, riot, flood, earthquake or explosion, hail, windstorm, falling or flying objects, damage due to contact with a bird or animal and sometimes, depending on the policy, windshield damage.
Car and Deer Collisions Cause 200 Deaths, Cost $4 Billion a Year

There is a balance.

 

[hortysir]

Hunting and Habitat Manipulation

From hearing hunters talk about the overpopulations of deer, bears and other "game" animals, one would think they are practically tripping over these megafauna in the American wilderness. However, this is not the case, and both public and private lands are managed in a variety of ways to increase hunting opportunities, regardless of what is natural or necessary.

The most egregious example is probably clearcutting. In an attempt to boost deer populations, state wildlife management agencies, which are run by hunters for hunters and make their money from the sales of hunting licenses, will clearcut the forests on public lands in order to create the edge habitat that is favored by deer. In their literature, they seldom admit that this is the purpose of the clearcutting, and often vaguely claim that it benefits "wildlife" or "game." Many Americans believe we already have too many deer, and would not tolerate attempts to increase the deer population.

==================================================

Hunting and the Wildlife Overpopulation Myth

Hunters claim to take the place of other predators in controlling the populations of prey species. There are several problems with this argument:

The populations of prey species do not need to be controlled. As discussed above, deer populations are artificially increased to maximize hunting opportunities. Hunters increase the deer population to create the illusion of deer overpopulation in order to gain public support for hunting.

Hunters do not act like other predators. While other predators target the old, the young, the sick and the weak, hunters target the largest specimens with the biggest tusks, antlers or horns. Instead of culling the weakest members of the species and helping the species to evolve to be stronger, hunters are what Newsweek magazine calls "evolution in reverse" and "survival of the weak and scrawny." Bighorn sheep now have smaller horns compared to thirty years ago, and fewer African and Asian elephants have tusks.

If the deer in a certain area become overpopulated and food is scarce, the lack of food will cause weaker individuals to starve to death and the fawns will absorb more embryos and have fewer offspring.

In addition to artificially increasing wild populations of deer, state wildlife management agencies also breed animals specifically to be hunted. Predators do not breed pheasant and quail so they can be hunted.

Hunters often say that a population of animals is "overabundant," which is not a scientific term, but misleads the public into thinking that the animals are overpopulated. Overpopulation is a scientific concept, and exists when a species exceeds its biological carrying capacity. This deceptive terminology gains public sympathy for hunting and creates an illusion that hunting is desirable or even necessary.

Hunting and the Environment - Are Hunters Environmentalists

I have been saying for years that hunters do not "love" nature, they love a false nature manipulated to serve their means. More human dominance over the natural world to its detriment. I cannot wait to hear the apologists come along and dispute this; should be fun!

The writer of this piece XXXXXXX doesn't support his claims.

 

[Intense]

Just a reminder. The CDZ is under Zone 1 Posting Rules. No Name Calling other Posters or putting them down. No insulting them. No Neg Reps. The focus is Civil Discourse regardless of the topic.

 

[Missourian]

Thank god no, and if I had I certainly wouldn't admit it. I'd be too ashamed.

Are you a strict vegan?

I mean strict...no fish, nothing that contains or uses animal byproducts.

If not, you hunt by proxy.

You should be ashamed to hunt by proxy then proclaim that you would be ashamed to admit it.

I wouldn't consider the slaughter of domestic animals to be "hunting". Hunting is a far more fair and natural way to obtain meat for food than farming. The animal gets to live in its natural habitat until it is harvested. Ever seen a big corporate cattle ranch?

Excellent point.

Perhaps killing by proxy would be more appropriate.

 

[daveman]

Cars and deer can be a lethal combination. An increase in urban sprawl and more roads being built through wildlife habitats have displaced deer from their natural habitat, leading to a rise in deer-vehicle collisions, according to the Insurance Information Institute (I.I.I)

Deer migration and mating season generally runs from October through December, and causes a dramatic increase in the movement of the deer population. As a result, more deer-vehicle collisions occur in this period than at any other time of year, so drivers need to be especially vigilant.

An estimated 1.23 million deer-vehicle collisions occurred in the U.S. between July 1, 2011 and June 30, 2012, costing more than $4 billion in vehicle damage, according to State Farm, the nation’s leading auto insurer.

Damage caused by an accident with deer or other animals is covered under the optional comprehensive portion (not the collision portion) of an automobile insurance policy. Comprehensive auto insurance includes coverage for: fire, theft, vandalism or malicious damage, riot, flood, earthquake or explosion, hail, windstorm, falling or flying objects, damage due to contact with a bird or animal and sometimes, depending on the policy, windshield damage.
Car and Deer Collisions Cause 200 Deaths, Cost $4 Billion a Year

There is a balance.

My insurance company, USAA, doesn't even require a police report. Just call an agent and tell him a *%#$@!! deer ran out in front of you.

I hit two in 2011. Did a total of $7,000 in damages to my Town & Country. One more and they'll total it. Hell, if a headlight burns out, they'll total it.

Praise God that no one was hurt in the collisions.

 

[KissMy]

The huge drought last year lowered the wild & domestic animal populations. They should bounce back in time. A future stress may come from more efficient harvesting equipment. A few years ago we completely modified our Case/IH combine & switched to a Mac-Don flex draper header that we also modified. This machine really picks the fields clean. I have noticed a decrease in wildlife on our farm because of it. They now prefer the neighboring farms. Now 2 other farmers in our county have followed our lead. Wildlife may soon be stressed for food if this becomes a trend. There is currently no other harvester on the market that picks a corn field as clean as mine. But is is only a matter of time before they start producing them.

 

[Sunshine]

Hunting and Habitat Manipulation

From hearing hunters talk about the overpopulations of deer, bears and other "game" animals, one would think they are practically tripping over these megafauna in the American wilderness. However, this is not the case, and both public and private lands are managed in a variety of ways to increase hunting opportunities, regardless of what is natural or necessary.

The most egregious example is probably clearcutting. In an attempt to boost deer populations, state wildlife management agencies, which are run by hunters for hunters and make their money from the sales of hunting licenses, will clearcut the forests on public lands in order to create the edge habitat that is favored by deer. In their literature, they seldom admit that this is the purpose of the clearcutting, and often vaguely claim that it benefits "wildlife" or "game." Many Americans believe we already have too many deer, and would not tolerate attempts to increase the deer population.

==================================================

Hunting and the Wildlife Overpopulation Myth

Hunters claim to take the place of other predators in controlling the populations of prey species. There are several problems with this argument:

The populations of prey species do not need to be controlled. As discussed above, deer populations are artificially increased to maximize hunting opportunities. Hunters increase the deer population to create the illusion of deer overpopulation in order to gain public support for hunting.

Hunters do not act like other predators. While other predators target the old, the young, the sick and the weak, hunters target the largest specimens with the biggest tusks, antlers or horns. Instead of culling the weakest members of the species and helping the species to evolve to be stronger, hunters are what Newsweek magazine calls "evolution in reverse" and "survival of the weak and scrawny." Bighorn sheep now have smaller horns compared to thirty years ago, and fewer African and Asian elephants have tusks.

If the deer in a certain area become overpopulated and food is scarce, the lack of food will cause weaker individuals to starve to death and the fawns will absorb more embryos and have fewer offspring.

In addition to artificially increasing wild populations of deer, state wildlife management agencies also breed animals specifically to be hunted. Predators do not breed pheasant and quail so they can be hunted.

Hunters often say that a population of animals is "overabundant," which is not a scientific term, but misleads the public into thinking that the animals are overpopulated. Overpopulation is a scientific concept, and exists when a species exceeds its biological carrying capacity. This deceptive terminology gains public sympathy for hunting and creates an illusion that hunting is desirable or even necessary.

Hunting and the Environment - Are Hunters Environmentalists

I have been saying for years that hunters do not "love" nature, they love a false nature manipulated to serve their means. More human dominance over the natural world to its detriment. I cannot wait to hear the apologists come along and dispute this; should be fun!

There ARE too many deer where I live. It isn't safe to drive. And here it was put to a referendum how to manage this over population. The choice was either euthanasia or hunting. I voted for hunting because a lot of people here need the food. Meat doesn't grow on the super market shelf in a plastic container. There is no difference in breeding tame animals or wild ones for food. People still have to eat and forcing a family to buy expensive beef and other meat when they can have venison, rabbit, squirrel, raccoon, etc. etc. for free is ludicrous.

 

[Sunshine]

The huge drought last year lowered the wild & domestic animal populations. They should bounce back in time. A future stress may come from more efficient harvesting equipment. A few years ago we completely modified our Case/IH combine & switched to a Mac-Don flex draper header that we also modified. This machine really picks the fields clean. I have noticed a decrease in wildlife on our farm because of it. They now prefer the neighboring farms. Now 2 other farmers in our county have followed our lead. Wildlife may soon be stressed for food if this becomes a trend. There is currently no other harvester on the market that picks a corn field as clean as mine. But is is only a matter of time before they start producing them.

Not here. All it did was bring them out of the woods to eat the plants in the lawn.

 

[DarkLion]

What's more valuable to you: 150 humans killed and tens of thousand injured, or some deer?

Both and neither. I do not place humans above or below animals. You're asking the wrong question though. You should be asking why predators have been culled to drastically that prey animal populations have ballooned to such high numbers.