The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Hunt

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old June 15, 2011, 10:58 PM   #1
C0untZer0
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 21, 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 4,555
Growing Deer Population Hurts Survival Of Forests

I love it when the idiotic policies of the tree-huggers and animal rights activists collide:

http://www.npr.org/2011/06/15/137192...an-for-forests

While the answer is pretty simple that they need to allow hunters to control this deer population, I wouldn't be surprised if the wackos propose introducing wolves in Maryland as the answer...
C0untZer0 is offline  
Old June 16, 2011, 08:39 AM   #2
Art Eatman
Staff Lead
 
Join Date: November 13, 1998
Location: Terlingua, TX, USA
Posts: 22,540
Deer are browsers, not grazers. Herbs and forbs, not grasses--unless the herbs and forbs have all been eaten. Deer then begin to eat tree leaves and even soft fruitwood bark. When they exceed the carrying capacity of the land, you begin to see the bottoms of trees show a "browse line", just as in pastures with too many goats.

So, if deer are indeed the cause of the lack of biodiversity of weeds and woody plants, it's time for the wildlife agency to rethink bag limits.
__________________
You're from BATFE? Come right in! I use all your fine products!
Art Eatman is offline  
Old June 16, 2011, 11:10 AM   #3
Scorch
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2006
Location: Washington state
Posts: 11,477
This debate has been ongoing for about a decade. State wildlife/game departments are split on whether to decrease deer populations and suffer the wrath of hunters who "want more opportunities" (want to kill deer without having to work at it) and state wonks who want the revenue generated by license sales, or to reduce the herds to carrying capacity and preserve the forest ecosystems and avoid a population collapse. We hear from deer herd managers how there are more deer today than when the Pilgrims landed at Plymouth/we signed the Declaration of Independence/Lewis and Clark went West. A critical thinker will observe that there is far less habitat today than 300 years ago, so (assuming the herds were in equilibrium back then) we have a serious issue. It has gone far beyond the point of just minor tweaking of deer numbers, many argue that we need to decrease deer herds by 50% or more. Most state wildlife agencies feed during the winter (hay is expensive, as is the cost of transporting it to remote areas), and animal damage claims are way up (paid for with your tax dollars, which are dwindling), so the situation is largely untenable as is. Natural control (releasing predators or disease) is politically charged. So let's all sit back on the Lazy Boy and watch how this all plays out, or actually let the overeducated biologists do their jobs. I say a 1-buck/2-doe limit sounds just right.
__________________
Never try to educate someone who resists knowledge at all costs.
But what do I know?
Summit Arms Services
Taylor Machine
Scorch is offline  
Old June 16, 2011, 12:29 PM   #4
Old Grump
Member in memoriam
 
Join Date: April 9, 2009
Location: Blue River Wisconsin, in
Posts: 3,144
Been going on for decades not a decade. Back in the dark ages after Nam was over and the establishment of no hunting zones and forest preserves in Illinois in the collar counties the deer population grew quickly with no predators to keep them down. A walk through what was supposed to be a wilderness area was like a walk in a carefully cultivated park because all the forbs the deer could reach was gone and the deer were woefully undersized.

They naturally moved out into the neighborhoods and happily ate very expensive landscape plants. The same ninnies who complained about the deer eating up their prized oriental flowers were the loudest protesters when the park people put forth a designated rifle hunt plan or a limited archery season. They didn't want the deer killed, they just wanted the park service to explain to them that they couldn't go out and eat the residents shrubbery.

One more reason I was happy to leave that insanity behind and come back to Wisconsin where deer are looked at as a traffic hazard and a viable source of nutrition. Instead of hiding my guns from my neighbors they are in a gun rack over my bed. His are in the corner by his dresser.
__________________
Good intentions will always be pleaded for any assumption of power. The Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern will, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters.
--Daniel Webster--
Old Grump is offline  
Old June 16, 2011, 12:37 PM   #5
Deerhunter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 15, 2009
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 528
Same kind of stuff going on In MD

http://www.wtvr.com/videobeta/58e45872-a...esterfield

Deer attacked a dog. People aren't happy but they are the ones that argued for more restrictions on hunting
__________________
My idea of fast food is a mallard.
-Ted Nugent
Deerhunter is offline  
Old June 16, 2011, 12:58 PM   #6
ZeroJunk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 14, 2006
Location: Browns Summit NC
Posts: 2,485
In some states the deer poulation is such that you can kill as many as you want to. In my part of N.C. if you fill your tags you just go buy some more. The problem is that there are not enough hunters harvesting enough deer.

As far as habitat goes a mature forest is not great forage for a deer other than when the acorns fall compared to fields of beans and grain.
I would argue that in many areas the reason there are more deer now than when the pilgrims came is because they have more to eat.

Coyotes are hear now. I don't know what kind of effect they are having on the deer population. I'm sure it's some.

There are too many deer.
ZeroJunk is offline  
Old June 16, 2011, 01:22 PM   #7
moosemike
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 4, 2009
Location: Lebanon PA
Posts: 376
We used to have some pretty impressive browselines here in PA. Then the PGC greatly reduced the deer herd in this state by selling many more doe tags and increasing the length of doe season. It's worked and our forests are regenerating. It's a mistake for any state agency to maintain a deer herd larger than what the habitat can sustain.
__________________
et cognoscetis veritatem et veritas liberabit vos
moosemike is offline  
Old June 16, 2011, 01:36 PM   #8
PawPaw
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 24, 2010
Location: Central Louisiana
Posts: 3,113
Quote:
When they exceed the carrying capacity of the land, you begin to see the bottoms of trees show a "browse line", just as in pastures with too many goats.
Yep! When I was in the cattle business I'd run the cattle into the pecan orchard a couple of weeks before harvest. Cattle love pecan leaves and they'd eat a browse line that let us get the equipment under the nut trees.
__________________
Dennis Dezendorf

http://pawpawshouse.blogspot.com
PawPaw is offline  
Old June 16, 2011, 01:44 PM   #9
shortwave
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 17, 2007
Location: SOUTHEAST, OHIO
Posts: 5,936
We had an unfortunate thing here happen several years ago in Reys. Ohio. There's a park, in town that got over-run with deer. Well, the parks dept. wanted to get sharpshooters to lower the deer populace but the treehuggers and animal rights group fought them and kept decisions tied up for a couple years. The final decision was to trap many of these deer and relocate them. Trying to keep the 'animal lovers' happy.

Wasn't a successful operation to say the least. Most died truely gruesome deaths from the stress and disease's that had already started due to mal-nutrition.

A lesson learned the hard way. Now before the herds in populated areas in Ohio gets out of hand, sharpshooters are called in. I know of one area in Cols.,Ohio where there's anywhere from 125-150deer taken out of that herd a yr with no noticable decrease to the public.
shortwave is offline  
Old June 16, 2011, 02:14 PM   #10
mquail
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 14, 2011
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 145
"Wasn't a successful operation to say the least. Most died truely gruesome deaths from the stress and disease's that had already started due to mal-nutrition. "

Ahhh yes, shades of Cleveland Amory.
mquail is offline  
Old June 16, 2011, 02:40 PM   #11
shortwave
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 17, 2007
Location: SOUTHEAST, OHIO
Posts: 5,936
Quote:
Ahhh yes, shades of Cleveland Amory
Yea, I obtain some nice 8x10 glossies of a few mounds of dead, diseased deer that suffered a horrible death due to the stalling and was fortunate enough to pass them out to some of the animal rights protesters while telling them, "they loved those deer to death".
shortwave is offline  
Old June 16, 2011, 03:33 PM   #12
mquail
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 14, 2011
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 145
Quote:
Yea, I obtain some nice 8x10 glossies of a few mounds of dead, diseased deer that suffered a horrible death due to the stalling and was fortunate enough to pass them out to some of the animal rights protesters while telling them, "they loved those deer to death".
This could be tied in with the thread about arguing with the animal rights (?) people.
mquail is offline  
Old June 16, 2011, 03:57 PM   #13
Mainah
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 9, 2007
Posts: 526
Maine is really struggling with this issue, on several levels. On one hand we've had the emotional fights over deer who have overpopulated small islands where people live. In the end Lyme Disease has convinced almost all of the deer lovers to allow bow hunters to thin those herds.

But the deer herd up north has been shrinking for years. Most hunters blame coyotes, and that's certainly a factor. Meanwhile the southern and central parts of Maine are full of deer (and coyotes). Personally I give deer a lot of credit for adapting to people so well.
Mainah is offline  
Old June 16, 2011, 05:42 PM   #14
C0untZer0
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 21, 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 4,555
In Illinois they also had (have ?) a law that prohibits deer meat from being used to feed homeless or donated to food pantries.

I thought I saw a law on the dockett at ISRA site to change that...

haven't kept up with it, but I think it's just a very foolish law to forbid using deer meat to feed homeless people.

I am guessing farmers got that one passed...
C0untZer0 is offline  
Old June 16, 2011, 06:08 PM   #15
shortwave
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 17, 2007
Location: SOUTHEAST, OHIO
Posts: 5,936
Quote:
I'm guessing farmers got that one passed...
I would doubt that very seriously as most farmers I know are glad to see the deer dissappear from their croplands but aren't as a rule wasteful.

I'd be more inclined to think a state gov't agency got that one passed for ya.
shortwave is offline  
Old June 16, 2011, 07:08 PM   #16
YARDDOG(1)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: GATOR COUNTRY HA HA HA!
Posts: 690
In Florida you can shoot 2 a day, Any sex in archery & Bucks only with the smoke pole & Rifle season there is a whole week of doe days.

Still pleanty of deer in north Fl. Going to smoke my last ham on the 4th of July
Y/D
__________________
There's a GATOR in the bushes & She's Callin my name
>Molly Hatchett<
YARDDOG(1) is offline  
Old June 17, 2011, 03:23 AM   #17
FrankenMauser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2008
Location: 1B ID
Posts: 6,858
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Eatman
So, if deer are indeed the cause of the lack of biodiversity of weeds and woody plants, it's time for the wildlife agency to rethink bag limits.
And/or implement a population control measure for humans. It's not the animals' faults that they have been limited to such small areas.


Quote:
In Florida you can shoot 2 a day, Any sex in archery & Bucks only with the smoke pole & Rifle season there is a whole week of doe days.
Did they change it again? It went from 4 / day to 2 / day, when I was there. One buck per day, or 2 does. Weapon didn't matter.
__________________
"Such is the strange way that man works -- first he virtually destroys a species and then does everything in his power to restore it."
FrankenMauser is offline  
Old June 17, 2011, 09:39 AM   #18
Art Eatman
Staff Lead
 
Join Date: November 13, 1998
Location: Terlingua, TX, USA
Posts: 22,540
"I say a 1-buck/2-doe limit sounds just right."

Scorch, in your area that may very well be correct. However, in parts of central Texas, there oughta be a bounty on does, year around. Then again, in my part of Brewster County, IMO the mule deer season should be closed for a few years and a bounty instituted on coyotes and cougars for a few years.

As usual with any wildlife species, too much emotion and not enough pragmatism.
__________________
You're from BATFE? Come right in! I use all your fine products!
Art Eatman is offline  
Old June 17, 2011, 01:44 PM   #19
FrankenMauser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2008
Location: 1B ID
Posts: 6,858
Quote:
Then again, in my part of Brewster County, IMO the mule deer season should be closed for a few years and a bounty instituted on coyotes and cougars for a few years.
We are having similar issues in parts of Utah.... while also having the absolute opposite problem in others. The Division of Wildlife Resources has had to close some areas to hunting (Deer and/or Elk), and has pushed hard to get people shooting more coyotes.

Yet, at the same time, they have been prodding hunters to hit the land closer to home, for almost 10 years. There are so many deer, and so few hunters there, that most of the deer die of old age, or are hit by cars. But - Nearly all of the canyons along the Salt Lake Valley are only open to Archery hunting. Even for archery hunters... the regulations and seasons can be a pain, and access to land can be an issue (due to private land, mines, quarries, cabins, camp grounds, ski areas, recreation areas, and the regulations regarding hunting around them; as well as the fact that all of these canyons are protected watersheds). The DWR wants hunters to hit those canyons hard, but every other law and regulation governing the areas have been tailored to keep the hunters out.

It is so very difficult to have everyone come to agreement, on how to handle wildlife. Political views, philosophical views, religious views, and too many other issues always come into play.

An artificial condition (overpopulation of the land by humans) created the wildlife problems we have today. Only an artificial response can keep things in check (hunters - after whatever species requires attention at the time).
__________________
"Such is the strange way that man works -- first he virtually destroys a species and then does everything in his power to restore it."
FrankenMauser is offline  
Reply

Tags
conservation , deer , deer hunting , hunting , whitetail

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:56 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.10773 seconds with 7 queries