- Moderator
- #21
Win 3 BCS Championships in 4 years and the haters come out of the woods, huh?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Deer populations get out of hand quickly. Alabama has a whitetail population of around 1.5 million head. Wildlife biologists say roughly 500,000 need to be culled annually to maintain a healthy, stable herd.
The difference is, with the extra taxes and fees that hunters pay, Alabama makes money off the population control. The same with most other states.
$3k a head for birth control?? LMAO!
A text titled "Wildlife Ecology and Management" by William Robinson states quite clearly:
"The general theory of harvesting animals is based on the premise that when animals are not harvested at all, growth and recruitment are balanced by natural mortality and that the average growth rate of a population at its carrying capacity is zero. Harvesting reduces the population size, but the reduction results in an increase in the growth rate of the population. This increase in growth rate is brought about because of higher birth rates and lower death rates resulting from decreased competition for resources. This increased growth rate provides a surplus of individuals above the number required to replace the population, and this surplus can be harvested."
Hunting only lowers deer numbers on a temporary basis. A study by Richter & Labisky, "Reproductive Dynamics and Disjunct White-tailed Deer Herds in Florida," in The Journal of Wildlife Management, determined that the "incidence of twinning was 38% on hunted herds and 14% on nonhunted sites."
Hunting serves no purpose other than to provide hunters with game, the DEP with funding, and residents with a feeling that "something" is being done about deer numbers, while ensuring that those numbers will replenish by the next hunting season, ad infinitum.
That's why, according to the FCMDMA, even after a concerted effort of killing deer for so many years, populations have not decreased. Their solution would be to hire sharpshooters who are more efficient than recreational hunters, erroneously citing Harvard's Andrew Spielman as supporting a 10-12 deer population per square mile, claiming that Lyme disease would be eliminated.
Win 3 BCS Championships in 4 years and the haters come out of the woods, huh?
Sorry to burst all of you all's ideas of deer population control, but...
Hunting actually spurs the growth of the herds. By removing competition for food sources Mother Nature concludes there is ample food for increased numbers and she sends the message to all the would-be deer parents that the green light is lit to GO forth and re-populate.
Therefore, hunting increases deer numbers.
The best way to reduce the herd is to let Mother Nature do it.
It might take a season or two for their numbers to diminish naturally, but that's the only sure way to do it.
And the funny thing is that the game wardens and those folks understand this dynamic.
Maybe they are trying to just get hunting introduced in that county. It is a great thing for those hunters living in and around that area. They won't have to drive as far to get some meat and their hunting groove on.
Here, I found this to substantiate my, admittedly, counter-intuitive claim.
A text titled "Wildlife Ecology and Management" by William Robinson states quite clearly:
"The general theory of harvesting animals is based on the premise that when animals are not harvested at all, growth and recruitment are balanced by natural mortality and that the average growth rate of a population at its carrying capacity is zero. Harvesting reduces the population size, but the reduction results in an increase in the growth rate of the population. This increase in growth rate is brought about because of higher birth rates and lower death rates resulting from decreased competition for resources. This increased growth rate provides a surplus of individuals above the number required to replace the population, and this surplus can be harvested."
Hunting only lowers deer numbers on a temporary basis. A study by Richter & Labisky, "Reproductive Dynamics and Disjunct White-tailed Deer Herds in Florida," in The Journal of Wildlife Management, determined that the "incidence of twinning was 38% on hunted herds and 14% on nonhunted sites."
Hunting serves no purpose other than to provide hunters with game, the DEP with funding, and residents with a feeling that "something" is being done about deer numbers, while ensuring that those numbers will replenish by the next hunting season, ad infinitum.
That's why, according to the FCMDMA, even after a concerted effort of killing deer for so many years, populations have not decreased. Their solution would be to hire sharpshooters who are more efficient than recreational hunters, erroneously citing Harvard's Andrew Spielman as supporting a 10-12 deer population per square mile, claiming that Lyme disease would be eliminated.
Hunting has increased deer population, not reduced it - GreenwichTime
Sorry to burst all of you all's ideas of deer population control, but...
Hunting actually spurs the growth of the herds. By removing competition for food sources Mother Nature concludes there is ample food for increased numbers and she sends the message to all the would-be deer parents that the green light is lit to GO forth and re-populate.
Therefore, hunting increases deer numbers.
The best way to reduce the herd is to let Mother Nature do it.
It might take a season or two for their numbers to diminish naturally, but that's the only sure way to do it.
And the funny thing is that the game wardens and those folks understand this dynamic.
Maybe they are trying to just get hunting introduced in that county. It is a great thing for those hunters living in and around that area. They won't have to drive as far to get some meat and their hunting groove on.
Here, I found this to substantiate my, admittedly, counter-intuitive claim.
A text titled "Wildlife Ecology and Management" by William Robinson states quite clearly:
"The general theory of harvesting animals is based on the premise that when animals are not harvested at all, growth and recruitment are balanced by natural mortality and that the average growth rate of a population at its carrying capacity is zero. Harvesting reduces the population size, but the reduction results in an increase in the growth rate of the population. This increase in growth rate is brought about because of higher birth rates and lower death rates resulting from decreased competition for resources. This increased growth rate provides a surplus of individuals above the number required to replace the population, and this surplus can be harvested."
Hunting only lowers deer numbers on a temporary basis. A study by Richter & Labisky, "Reproductive Dynamics and Disjunct White-tailed Deer Herds in Florida," in The Journal of Wildlife Management, determined that the "incidence of twinning was 38% on hunted herds and 14% on nonhunted sites."
Hunting serves no purpose other than to provide hunters with game, the DEP with funding, and residents with a feeling that "something" is being done about deer numbers, while ensuring that those numbers will replenish by the next hunting season, ad infinitum.
That's why, according to the FCMDMA, even after a concerted effort of killing deer for so many years, populations have not decreased. Their solution would be to hire sharpshooters who are more efficient than recreational hunters, erroneously citing Harvard's Andrew Spielman as supporting a 10-12 deer population per square mile, claiming that Lyme disease would be eliminated.
Hunting has increased deer population, not reduced it - GreenwichTime
If you're not gonna eat it you shouldn't shoot it.
If you're not gonna eat it you shouldn't shoot it.
That is a good rule, with the exception of those who shoot coyote. I'm not eating a coyote. But they do need to be kept in check.
you can shoot 30 deer during this special hunt btw
they must have one heck a problem
Deer populations get out of hand quickly. Alabama has a whitetail population of around 1.5 million head. Wildlife biologists say roughly 500,000 need to be culled annually to maintain a healthy, stable herd.
The difference is, with the extra taxes and fees that hunters pay, Alabama makes money off the population control. The same with most other states.
$3k a head for birth control?? LMAO!
New York State has an estimated population of 7 million deer. Cities like NYC shun hunting, hunters and their paraphernalia. According to the new SNAP law Cuomo is also imposing draconian laws for possession of firearms throughout the state along with the non-availability of ammunition.
Deer populations get out of hand quickly. Alabama has a whitetail population of around 1.5 million head. Wildlife biologists say roughly 500,000 need to be culled annually to maintain a healthy, stable herd.
The difference is, with the extra taxes and fees that hunters pay, Alabama makes money off the population control. The same with most other states.
$3k a head for birth control?? LMAO!
New York State has an estimated population of 7 million deer. Cities like NYC shun hunting, hunters and their paraphernalia. According to the new SNAP law Cuomo is also imposing draconian laws for possession of firearms throughout the state along with the non-availability of ammunition.
Yeah.....I live here and this state is slowly becoming a Jonestown thanks to the idea's of the k00k left. As of yesterday, ordering ammo on the internet is not an option. Brilliant.
New York State has an estimated population of 7 million deer. Cities like NYC shun hunting, hunters and their paraphernalia. According to the new SNAP law Cuomo is also imposing draconian laws for possession of firearms throughout the state along with the non-availability of ammunition.
Yeah.....I live here and this state is slowly becoming a Jonestown thanks to the idea's of the k00k left. As of yesterday, ordering ammo on the internet is not an option. Brilliant.
That is a good thing.
If you're not gonna eat it you shouldn't shoot it.
If you're not gonna eat it you shouldn't shoot it.