Deer hunt in Massachusetts recreational area sparks backlash

[Omaha Steve]

Source: AP

By MARK PRATT

BOSTON (AP) — A plan to allow hunting in a nearly 11-square-mile swath of pristine forest within sight of downtown Boston to thin the exploding deer population is coming under fire from activists who insist that contraception and other more humane methods be used.

The hunt in the Blue Hills Reservation is needed to trim a deer population estimated at 85 animals per square mile, far above the ideal of six to 18 deer per square mile, according to state wildlife biologists. Hunting has not been allowed in the park since the state set it aside for public recreational use in 1893.

The deer are a threat to public safety and a threat to the forest ecosystem, said Matthew Sisk, deputy commissioner of the Department of Conservation and Recreation, the state agency that oversees the park, popular with hikers, mountain bikers and cross country skiers.

Ninety-eight hunters, armed only with shotguns, will be allowed in the reservation for each two-day hunting session — Nov. 30 and Dec. 1, and Dec. 7-8 — and only about 3,000 of the reservation's 7,000 acres will be open to them. Hunters will be allowed to take up to six deer, and the goal is to get down to the ecologically stable level of fewer than 20 deer per square mile, which state officials acknowledge may not be reached this year.

FULL story at link.


In this Sunday, Nov. 15, 2015, photo, Rosemaire Leavy, right, of Haverhill, Mass., displays a placard during a demonstration in Canton, Mass., to protest a planned deer hunt in the Blue Hills Reservation. A plan to allow hunting to cull an exploding deer population in a 7,000-acre swath of forest within sight of downtown Boston is under fire from activists who insist that more humane methods, including contraception or sterilization, be used. (AP Photo/Steven Senne)

Read more: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/a254eb0faa9341aebaaeb820d97007b4/deer-hunt-massachusetts-recreational-area-sparks-backlash

---

Does within site mean a wild shot could reach a home etc?

Just across the Mo river less than a 1/4 mile from us is hunting land. Every once in a while neighbors talk about one zinging through the area.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

1. How on earth did the ecology ever survive before humans came around to let it know just how many

were 'ideal' and a 'threat to the ecosystem'?

[Demeter]

2. Predators

The wolf and other carnivores kept the deer in check and the populations in balance:

How Wolves Saved the Foxes, Mice and Rivers of Yellowstone National Park

http://earthjustice.org/blog/2015-july/how-wolves-saved-the-foxes-mice-and-rivers-of-yellowstone-national-park?gclid=COTI2tTVpMkCFZM2gQodfvQH7g#

The land of Old Faithful wasn’t always so lush. Two decades ago, Yellowstone National Park was the victim of defoliation, erosion and an unbalanced ecosystem. But in 1995, everything changed.

That was the year wolves were reintroduced to the park. Before then, government predator control programs had all but eliminated the gray wolf from America’s lower 48 states. Consequently, deer and elk populations increased substantially, resulting in overgrazing, particularly of willows and other vegetation important to soil and riverbank structure, leaving the landscape vulnerable to erosion. In the absence of wolves, the entire ecosystem of the park suffered.

A film, which has garnered more than 18 million views on YouTube, gives a captivating explanation of Yellowstone’s turnaround. British writer George Monbiot lends his voice to this short documentary, and his zeal is infectious as he describes how wolves reinvigorated the park. “We all know that wolves kill many animals, but perhaps we’re slightly less aware that they give life to many others,” he says in the film. So much of our knowledge of these creatures focuses on their potential threat to humans, rather than their biological importance.

http://www.yellowstonepark.com/2011/06/wolf-reintroduction-changes-ecosystem/

On a quiet spring morning, a resounding “Slap!” reverberates through the air above a remote stream leading to Lake Yellowstone. Over much of the past century, it has been a rarely heard noise in the soundscape that is Yellowstone National Park, but today is growing more common-the sound of a beaver slapping its tail on the water as a warning to other beavers.

When the grey wolf was reintroduced into the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem in 1995, there was only one beaver colony in the park, said Doug Smith, a wildlife biologist in charge of the Yellowstone Wolf Project.

Today, the park is home to nine beaver colonies, with the promise of more to come, as the reintroduction of wolves continues to astonish biologists with a ripple of direct and indirect consequences throughout the ecosystem.

A flourishing beaver population is just one of those consequences, said Smith...you have to go back to the 1930s, when the wolf was killed off in Yellowstone. Even though Yellowstone elk were still preyed upon by black and grizzly bears, cougars and, to a lesser extent, coyotes, the absence of wolves took a huge amount of predatory pressure off the elk, said Smith. As a result, elk populations did very well-perhaps too well. Two things happened: the elk pushed the limits of Yellowstone’s carrying capacity, and they didn’t move around much in the winter-browsing heavily on young willow, aspen and cottonwood plants. That was tough for beaver, who need willows to survive in winter.

Now, my sister lives in Westford, not that far from Boston, and there's a bear terrorizing the neighborhood, eating bird feeders and small pets....but I can't think they'd want bears, wolves, coyote and such in urban areas....

Here in Ann Arbor, the deer density isn't anything like that. Among other things, Michigan has an avidly-attended hunting season. But the city council has authorized a deer hunt in two of the 5 wards for 100 deer in the dead of night, sometime this winter. It seems that those with land (a very small wealthy number, most of the city is apartments and condos) are tired of having their landscaping eaten...

[greg1024]

12. How about a bow hunt.

[Demeter]

15. That would be my preference, especially in subdivisions in the dead of night....

I've heard that it's only going to be on public lands like parks...but parks are tucked in everywhere in this town, any left-over patch in a project, or wetlands...

Frankly, it's a ridiculous idea. We will see what actually happens. I've seen a lot of dead deer on the roadsides lately....

[yeoman6987]

27. And that is the biggest problem

Too many deer are getting killed by cars and getting people killed. I can't believe the auto insurance companies haven't sued the states that have lax deer control. Do the contraceptives if necessary. Do something!!!! We talk about human deaths in other areas of life but not death By overpopulated deer.

[Demeter]

34. I do not know of anyone being killed by hitting a deer in the city

You would have to be speeding very fast, or incredibly unlucky in the scenario, to do that.

Now, highways would be another matter, but I haven't heard of anyone dying from hitting a deer on the interstate, either.

Since there are no cliffs to veer off by accident in the prairie states, I don't think it's much of a problem.

[Omaha Steve]

50. Creighton community mourns ‘beautiful souls’ of four young women killed in car crash

Highway deaths and interstate deaths. They had to build a fence on the interstate here for a deer crossing in a bad area: http://journalstar.com/news/local/study-i--deer-fence-doing-its-job/article_ad228d96-a5cf-52bc-a587-e273c4f0bf4f.html

Collisions between vehicles and deer happen. Perhaps more than most Nebraskans imagine. The average Nebraska driver has a 1 in 109 chance of hitting a deer according to accident statistics from American Family Insurance: http://www.newsnetnebraska.org/2011/11/07/i-80-fence-targets-deer-vehicle-collisions/

Marta and I saw a deer broadsided that was avoidable. The other driver wasn't paying attention, texting, phone. It was dark but we stopped. He was coming from the other direction and never even slowed. Drove away too. We waited for the police to show before continuing to work.



TYLER MEYER/THE WORLD-HERALD

Giselle Armendariz, Elsa Barragan and Kassandra Nolasco, all members of the Sigma Lambda Gamma sorority at UNL, erect a memorial for four Creighton students killed the night before in a car accident south of Beatrice on U.S. Highway 77.

http://www.omaha.com/news/metro/creighton-community-mourns-beautiful-souls-of-four-young-women-killed/article_41368570-7b26-11e5-99a0-5782ed53fd38.html

Akuel Majouk, Mariana Ramirez, Jennifer Guzman, and Yoselin Deleon died Saturday evening on a stretch of Nebraska highway after Majouk swerved to avoid a deer.

Each had ties to Creighton University, and on Sunday evening the Creighton community encircled family and friends in a Mass that celebrated the women’s lives, while giving voice to grief.

“Their families are a part of our family,” said Shannon Roussy of the Tau Delta chapter of Sigma Lambda Gamma sorority, which three of the women belonged to.

FULL story at link.

[Demeter]

57. The rule is DO NOT SWERVE; hit the deer!

better than hitting another car at highway speeds...

I've never been to Nebraska. Bet they have large herds there.

[MosheFeingold]

43. Shotguns are being used

The round travels about the same as a bow.

It's also more certain to kill the animal; a wounded animal is a real threat.

[TexasProgresive]

3. In this case wolves & other predators

We've killed them off so it's all out of balance.

[MosheFeingold]

44. The natural way

Would be to allow the population to grow until resources are depleted and disease/starvation sets in. Boom and bust.

Me, I'd rather see a herd thinned rather than most die a horrid death.

[Eleanors38]

92. "Nature" also allows vegetation to be stripped and other species threatened...

Deer don't have a massive die-off in a vacuum. They strip the countryside, threatening the loss of flora and fawna of many other species. In some areas of Texas, deer over-population results in young oaks being eaten; the loss of this slow-growing tree may not be noticed for generations, until mature oaks die off themselves.

[Skeeter Barnes]

4. I imagine shotgun slugs don't travel near as far as rifle bullets. Much heavier and slower.

"Within sight" of the city could be miles.

[MosheFeingold]

45. Correct.

Maybe 50 yards in the woods.

The energy of buck shot or slug disperses quickly.

[BlueJazz]

5. According to this map, seems like the hunters/bullets would be fairly close to civilization and I-93

But, I'm no expert on this type of scenario. (Zoom out!)

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Blue+Hills+Reservation/@42.2129627,-71.116309,13z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x89e37de3ca7d9d77:0xf76fd9980d6a8aca

[Demeter]

58. I-95 is not civilization--I've driven it at all hours

talk about your wild West....

[Marrah_G]

79. It's 93, not 95, big difference.

[BlueJazz]

84. Well, apparently your eyes are better than mine. Thanks!

[Marrah_G]

86. nah- I am just from here :)

[Gormy Cuss]

62. It is very close to neighborhoods and major roads.

When I lived in Boston I hiked there nearly every week from Spring through fall. It's a long ridge of hills in the central area. The southern section near Ponkapong is flatter and popular with families.

Honestly, I can't imagine that any part of this park is isolated enough to allow general hunting. I also never saw deer there --big old nasty rattlesnakes, several times but never deer and I hiked the less popular (quieter) areas of the hills.

[Marrah_G]

78. Its bordered by rt 93, also known as the Expressway

Extremely busy road.

[Judi Lynn]

6. What kind of person enjoys murdering animals? Morally collapsed,primitive, ugly people. Subhuman.n/t

[EX500rider]

7. These kind?

[dhill926]

10. poseurs....

hate it when pols pull this fake shit....

[beevul]

14. The majority of the human race who are not vegetarians...

The majority of the human race who are not vegetarians, who either kill it, or buy it after someone else does on their behalf, don't seem to have the same issue with it as you do.

Morally collapsed,primitive, ugly people. Subhuman.

Yeah. Hunters are subhuman.

That will play well with mainstream America.

[LanternWaste]

40. You equate entertainment via killing something with eating?

You equate entertainment via killing something with eating? That's quite the fallacious leap you've made, regardless of the petulant irrelevancy of mainstream America (although I do realize that bias often compels the irrational and the dogmatic to consciously conflate two wholly separate concepts into one to better validate their predispositions towards sacred cows).

[beevul]

53. No, the poster I responded to did...

No, the poster I responded to did, in making the implications that she did, in response to the OP.

Its really not that difficult, or that complex.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

56. You do realize that the vast majority of hunters eat what they kill

And donate what they don't to local food banks?

You realize no one is advocating just shooting and mounting their head, right?

And you're babbling about bias and presumption all the time?

I mean I have to ask with you, because........never mind.

[Demeter]

16. Michigan has been in an unrelieved Depression since 1999

many a home doesn't have to buy beef because of their hunters.

There's also Chronic Wasting Disease popping up in the state, not good for the herds.

[darkangel218]

19. +1 million!

[NickB79]

25. What kind of person enjoys a denuded forest and dying trees stripped of their bark?

You have no idea how destructive deer can become to an ecosystem when predation is removed.

http://blog.nature.org/science/2013/08/22/too-many-deer/

[Travis_0004]

28. I had chicken for dinner

Is that ok, since I had somebody else murder the chicken?

[Skittles]

30. would you find it entertaining to kill?

gun humping cowards think killing is just swell entertainment

[Travis_0004]

32. Its a cheap source of meat

And its helping to control the population.

[Skittles]

33. see #31

[Eleanors38]

93. Would you include "bow-humping cowards?"

[Judi Lynn]

37. You need to put in some time with your conscience, as others do. n/t

[Skittles]

29. I have never and would never date a hunter

anyone who finds slaughtering animals entertaining makes me sick

[darkangel218]

36. Same here.

[Judi Lynn]

38. Not much to respect there. Something's really missing. I agree so much. n/t

[Vincardog]

52. Does hunting equate with "solely for entertainment" in your mind? I know people who hunt to eat.

[Brickbat]

61. Hunting is OK only if the children are starving at home and the hunter doesn't enjoy any part of the

process.

[Vincardog]

65. Your Series right?

[Brickbat]

66. Just clarifying the intent of some of the other posters on here.

Seriesly.

[Vincardog]

67. Cool because the meat they eat growns in plastic on foam trays.

Seriesly.

[Brickbat]

76. Exactly.

[Skittles]

90. why don't they just admit they enjoy killing?

[Brickbat]

91. What would it do for you if they did?

[NickB79]

71. Have you visited a farm where your burgers and chicken come from?

I've grown up on a farm. I've seen the horror that is livestock ranching. Pigs, cattle, chickens on a small family farm.

There is no grey zone here: hunting for the meat you eat, even if you enjoy pulling the trigger, is far superior morally than almost any farming situation you could imagine.

[Skittles]

74. did you miss the word ENTERTAINING?

[NickB79]

82. No, I did not. It is, however, immaterial to the discussion at hand

Because every state in the US has laws and regulations against shooting deer exclusively for trophies. If you shoot it, you are required to utilize the meat. Doesn't matter if it's a doe or a 12-point buck, you can't just cut off the head and walk away. Either you eat it, or you donate it to a food shelf who will do the same. Leaving a perfectly good deer carcass to rot in the woods is a good way to get thousands in fines from the state Dept. of Natural Resources and revocation of your hunting license for years.

Your argument is a straw man.

Whether or not a hunter is simply ECSTATIC over the idea of pulling the trigger on a deer doesn't change the fact that eating meat you've shot yourself means fewer livestock tortured their entire lives on factory farms. And having seen what happens on said farms, there is virtually nothing a hunter could do morally that compares to what I've seen cattle and pigs subjected to.

[Skittles]

85. are you denying there are people who just LOVE to kill deer becuase they think it is fun?

people who do NOT need deer for food but just LOVE KILLING DEER?

*DONE HERE*

[Brickbat]

77. No, no -- you must go hunting with a heavy heart, and force yourself to pull the trigger so they

waifs at home can feed upon their meager portion. To do otherwise is a moral failing.

[shrike]

97. I agree completely

I've been on a hunt, though I don't hunt. And a good hunter ensures the animal does not suffer: the best hunter gets the job done with only one shot. Anyone who knows anything about slaughterhouses also knows it's a far better fate for an animal to be hunted by someone who knows what they're doing.

[snooper2]

42. What kind of person enjoys putting a condom on a buck?

Good Luck!

[dbackjon]

48. I assume then you are a complete Vegan?

[Marengo]

88. You need to take your own advice in post #28...

You need "to put in some time with your conscience" considering the company you keep when using the word "subhuman" to describe others.

[Eleanors38]

94. I resent that! I am not "ugly!"

[Sunlei]

8. 85 deer per square miles plus 98 hunters "armed only with shotguns" =

hundreds of panicked deer running through traffic.

[NickB79]

26. Deer don't stampede like you imagine

Seriously, similar hunts have been carried out all over the country for decades without herds of deer stampeding into traffic as you fear. Even without gunshots, deer already wander onto roads every single day and get hit by vehicles. One of the reasons to hunt them is to reduce the number of car accidents caused by their movement.

In wooded areas, deer typically run very short distances when they hear a gunshot, if they run at all (given how they haven't been hunted for so long).

[Eleanors38]

95. In most studies of white tail deer, home ranges are about a square mile...

They usually live and die in that area, pushing bounds only during the rut. When disturbed by a hunter or any threat, they run a short distance into heavy cover, and typically double back to ascertain the threat and form an escape plan. Some may jump over highways, but it sounds like the people here are already experiencing that problem. In some states, notably Pennsylvania, driven deer hunts employ a line of hunters who "drive" deer toward hunters posted up to intercept them, but even here, the deer frequently stay put, or skulk back behing the drivers. It is not a sure-shot hunt. The species Mule Deer, native to more open country, will often run far greater distances as there is less cover in the West: these deer want to put distance between themselves and a threat. In these areas there are far fewer highways and people.

[Kali]

9. shot gun not a risk at 1/4 mile

[nadine_mn]

11. I am no fan of hunting -but when we remove an ecosystem's natural predators

this is what happens.

I don't know what the solution is - contraception will work to keep the future population down, but what about the current overabundance? Starvation for hundreds of hungry deer that have depleted the vegetation around them isn't very humane either.

It is sad all around.

[madville]

13. They could do archery and crossbow only maybe

But in the areas they have set aside shotguns will likely be safe.

I go deer, turkey and wild hog hunting myself. 85 deer per sq mile is crazy, as long as they are used for food I think it's a good idea.

[ileus]

17. Should be a great way to fill the freezer.

[Nac Mac Feegle]

20. Having that many deer per square mile is VERY bad for the environment AND the deer

Deer eat grasses and leaves, but when they graze off the grasses, there is nothing to hold the soil when the water runs. Either from rains or melting snow. This causes some very bad erosion and loss of massive amounts of topsoil. The more fodder available to the deer, the more they reproduce. This is called a irruption of the population. When their density gets too high, and they have grazed the grasses down to the roots, they will eat the leaves, shoots, and bark off the trees; the tender new growth first, and the tougher parts after. This often kills the trees, creating a fire hazard with all the dead wood lying about.

I have seen 'micro' examples of this when growing up in the West. A herd of deer will get trapped in a tree-break during a blizzard. They then eat all available forage, including the bark off the trees, before the whole herd starving to death. Where a few deer could have weathered the storm in the tree-break, the large herd kills not only themselves, but the trees. This has happened before on a 'macro' level, on what is called the Arizona Strip, the area north of the Kaibab Plateau, and the results are used as a 'textbook example'. When the predators are eliminated, the prey animals irrupt, causing massive ecological damage due to overgrazing, with the prey animals and the plant life dying off in great numbers.

A lot of people tend to think that humans aren't part of the ecological system, forgetting the native populations. The animals such as deer have evolved to respond to predation with fecundity. When some of the 'checks and balances' are removed, there are consequences, both immediate and long term. Compensating for those imbalances is where we have to step in. What may be seen by some as a 'grim calculus of Death' is, objectively, a means of refining the amount of intervention required to maintain a long term health of an ecosystem.

// Personal hypotheses on:

As our society has become dramatically urbanized due to a conversion from an agrarian society to an industrial one, much of the population is not familiar with all the processes that make up life. Some people think milk is manufactured in plastic jugs and paper boxes, hamburger comes in shrink-wrapped trays, and forget that there are cows involved.

Many people forget there is a reason that there is a phrase "Nature, red of fang and claw" exists.

Personal hypotheses off //

I had to do some extensive research on this group of subjects quite a few years ago, and learned quite a bit about how some things I'd run across in my life had come to be.

Hope this can add something to the collective knowledge.

[BumRushDaShow]

23. As a follow-on to your post and note about this issue here in Philadelphia

I have read reports (although I can't find the links to those articles that had the info embedded) that during the 1700s, Ben Franklin had noted the approximate count of deer within the city at about 10 - 15 or so. At that time, their predator (I believe the mountain lion) had free reign.

Now with the predators gone, the deer have exploded into the hundreds within the city park system (the 9200 acre Fairmount Park, (with estimates upwards of 1.5 million across PA), and they have devastated the native vegetation in the parks. This has ended up pitting the animal rights activists against the environmental activists. It came to a head around 2000/2001 when the state gaming commission allowed sharp-shooters to cull the herds in the city during certain periods. Just this past year, 165 were culled and processed in the city alone. Some private residents even allow cross bow hunting on their properties here in the city to cull. One activist described in that article was against hunting... until her family came down with Lyme Disease - despite fencing and other mitigation efforts that the average person would never be able to afford.

Unfortunately, one of my young nieces had the experience just last weekend on the way to an area mini-Girl Scout jamboree, of witnessing a car just a few cars ahead of the one she was in, hit a doe full on as it was attempting to dart across the busy road. The deer totaled that car as it slammed against the windshield, it's neck snapped, and guts splattered all over the road (the girls were told that a vet would be along to take care of the deer but from the adult perspective, it was obvious that it probably died on impact).

Where one of my sisters lives in a rim suburb, I have seen herds of 6 - 8 crossing between her house and her neighbor's house heading down through her backyard. Her hostas, daylillies, and most flowering bulbs (except daffodils) get munched to the ground yearly. They have even eaten plants that were supposed to be "deer resistant". Some of her neighbors put up those "rail and post" fences and I actually watched a deer gracefully leap over it like a show horse.

Like so many other things that happen when trying to deal with the environment, extremes will often lead to unintended consequences (e.g., the wind generators that in a number of cases, have disrupted and even killed migrating birds). In any case such as this, there needs to be recognition among all sides that there may be benefits for one side that may lead to negative effects for a different side. The irony here in PA is that the current deer population came about after the state almost hunted them to extinction and set about repopulating them at the turn of the last century.

[Drahthaardogs]

24. Deer are browsers, not grazers, they don't really eat grasses

Unless very early in the spring, or all other food sources have been depleted. Elk are grazers, bison are grazers, moose and deer are browsers.

[Demeter]

35. They like rosebushes, I found out this morning

[Art_from_Ark]

60. "Deer aren't grazers..."

Tell these deer that.
This picture was taken in mid-summer this year. They came every day to graze on the lush grass.

[Brickbat]

70. Grass is not their primary food source. Their teeth aren't made to graze efficiently.

It doesn't mean it won't happen. But they're primarily browsers, and they are devastating on trees, bushes and plants.

[NickB79]

72. At the density stated in the OP, they'll eat anything they can get at

Starving deer will graze the shit out of the land, after they've browsed the shit out of the forest.

[Brickbat]

81. Yep, they're hard on habitat when the numbers are out of balance.

[Drahthaardogs]

89. They are probably eating dandelions and other broadleaf leaves in the meadow mixed with the grass.

Deer are not grazers, period! It is one of the reasons they will destroy a forest. They eat browse. In the early spring, they will eat young grasses, but deer are not made to eat grass like a cow or a bison or an elk.

[Skittles]

31. the main reason people kill deer is because they enjoy killing deer

they never have the guts to admit that though - they make up shit about how they're doing us all a favor

[NickB79]

83. And the reason people eat meat is because they enjoy eating meat

At least hunters actually take the process of getting said meat into their own hands, instead of buying meat shrink-wrapped and sanitized on styrofoam trays at the market and pretending they aren't contributing to the massively cruel factory farming industry.

And these hunters will indeed be doing those who frequent this park a real favor, because without the hunters the deer will cause long-term damage to the native ecosystem as they strip the forest bare the larger their numbers grow.

[Nac Mac Feegle]

98. Errr,

Skittles, my friend, maybe you should take a few moments and step back. You kind of sound like you're becoming a little irrational on this subject.

If you have some 'baggage' on this subject, please tell us, so we can try to explain and try to answer your concerns.

This isn't Freeperville, where differing opinions are attacked. Remember, we're supposed to be the adults.

[truthisfreedom]

21. As inhumane as it sounds...

It might be the cheapest, safest and most efficient approach. I'm sure most of the hunters are quite experienced and shotgun slugs have a limited range, and the deer will end up as food as the ecosystem is rebalanced.

[Botany]

22. Those deer need to be thinned out .... end of story

Not only lyme disease but you lose much of native flora and fauna when the deer
population is too high. Deer are nice but so are wood thrushes, trilliums, and ferns.

BTW good hunters in tree stands shooting downward solves the problem of stray
shots.

[dbackjon]

49. Correct

Over population of deer is driving many native bird and plant species to extirpation.

[Botany]

54. We have more white tailed deer now in America then when the Mayflower landed

I work w/native plants and in many cases I can't use one of my favorite
plants .... Canada Yew ... because deep in a deer's DNA is a memory that
plant is candy to them.

We gotta shoot a lot of them and the most important ones to kill are the
does ..... deer hunters sometimes pass up on doe after doe to harvest
their "trophy buck" and that keeps the population going up and up.

BTW in Ohio deer rarely eat the non native invasive plants like honeysuckle
and privet.

dbackjon

[dbackjon]

55. I love Yew plants

Too bad they don't do well in the desert!


Re: Bucks vs Does
That is why targeted hunts like this are so important, if done right - you can limit the number of bucks taken, while encouraging does to be given a higher limit, etc and really make a difference.

[oneshooter]

39. Don't hunt them.

Just let them die off "naturally" and enjoy the smell of the several thousand rotting carcases in the spring. That is "natures way".

[Xithras]

41. 85 per square mile?!?!?

That's insane. That kind of density will eventually kill the entire forest. A deer herd that has no natural predators and is not hunted will double in size every 3 years until the population outgrows the local forests ability to support it. At that point, the deer begin to starve, and starving deer eat tree bark. When you strip a tree of its lower bark, it dies. With a population that high, you're looking at killing off a good chunk of that forest.

[truthisfreedom]

46. The idea of sterilizing or using contraception is pretty unrealistic.

It's far more economically reasonable to use hunters (they work for free) and no matter how inhumane you think it is, they are going to hunt deer anyway. Hunters work for free and take the carcasses away.

Like it or not, deer are a hazard when they get out of control. Around my log house in SE Minnesota I consider them vermin. They are a dangerous highway hazard (a life and death deal!) and they spread so many deer ticks that outdoor enjoyment is very affected by them here! My neighbor has had Lyme's twice and my friend up the road has a daughter who has had joint pain for years from Lyme's. It's a big deal.

[Omaha Steve]

47. Here is the deal on wolves, I think this makes sense

I'm surprised at the number of replies. They either have to trap and move the deer ($) or hunt them.

The area can not feed this many deer especially in the winter. They will starve after stripping bark (kill the trees) and vegetation when it isn't snow covered.

Or they could bring in a few wolves with tracking collars to pick them up after the desired result. As I understand it wolves will stay in the territory with that much food. Other predators like mountain lions can easily roam out of the intended area.

I posted this back in January, it had 63 R's: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026059351

There Were Too Many Deer In The Forest. So They Unleashed The Wolves Without Any Idea What Would Happen.

http://www.upworthy.com/there-were-too-many-deer-in-the-forest-so-they-unleashed-the-wolves-without-any-idea-what-would-happen?c=upw1

Curator: Matt Orr

When the deer killed off the forest, they decided to let the wolves loose to fix it. We had no idea what exactly we had done.

One of the most exciting scientific findings of the last 50 years is called a trophic cascade.

A trophic cascade starts at the top of the food chain and tumbles to the bottom. One of the best examples of this happened in Yellowstone National Park in 1995 when wolves were reintroduced.



Wolves are really good at eating deer. But as it turns out, because of their deer diet, they also help lots of other animals survive.

Basically, wolves see deer/elk like this:



Humans killed all the wolves in Yellowstone National Park 70 years ago. And the deer population exploded.

Humans, being the controlling type in our relationship with Earth, tried to control the deer population. But deer are super-good at showing each other lots of love ... so the population grew and grew. In 1995, we reintroduced wolves to the park, and they immediately started killing the deer. But that's the least remarkable part. The wolves actually started changing the behavior of the deer.




EDIT to add the video I left out by accident:

Check out "How Wolves Change Rivers" on Vimeo http://vimeo.com/86466357


FULL story at link.

[Hestia]

51. The one part I disagree with on the Upworthy post is the changing of rivers - the beavers

do/did that. When a beaver moves in (when it hears running water, its instinct is to stop it) and starts building a dam, they create pools, which changes the river. All through the wolf returning to the landscape in order for the beaver to thrive.

It's amazing how little others know of the damage that deer can do to a forest and if the predators have been hunted out, then humans will need to be a predator. During the Fall - rutting season - you have to be so careful when you drive down the back roads and highways. When a buck is in rut, it makes them nuts and they will attack cars. For some reason, they hated my supervisors car and one buck attacked it 3 times before she finally sold it. Her niece was killed when she hit a deer not too far from her house.

Here, I think I read that you have a 109 chance of hitting a deer. I was so lucky one time, in the summer, going down the highway and deer ran out in front of the car, the guy who was driving had massive experience and knew what to do - you go towards where the deer is headed, not behind them. Like when you turn into a skid on snowy/icy roads. Man, I will never forget that experience.

I'm sure other states have this program, the hunters here give a portion of their kill to feed the homeless. Over 100,000 families were feed last year via the program.

The hunters I knew were not bloodthirsty but did it to feed their families. Their wives though said you do get tired of venison all the time and want something else, but they saved massive amounts of money on their grocery bills which helps when you 3+ kids.

Besides, there ain't nothing like a properly-prepared slow roasted venison (I am not sure what part I ate). Man, that is some great tasting meat! No fat, no chemicals, free range meat.

[Marrah_G]

68. Also in this area there is no where for the deer to spread out to

It is surrounded by a very dense human population. Blue Hills is a large hill in the middle of a very populated area just barely outside the city. Quincy, Dedham, Milton, Randolph...

[Marrah_G]

80. Wolves would not be possible here

It' not an isolated park, it is well used and even has a ski area.

[Recursion]

59. "In sight of" Downtown Boston

[Gormy Cuss]

63. Yes, in sight of downtown and adjacent to the southern 'hoods of Boston.

This is an extremely popular park, especially the Great Blue and Chickatawbut hills and the summit trail between them. One doesn't need to be fit to walk into the trails at the base of the hills and in between them. And while it's 11 square miles, it's mostly a linear park and not that wide except near the flat area where Lake Ponkapong is.

I hope the hell they're planning on cordoning off every entry and posting signs on the perimeter trees before letting hunters start shooting.

[Marrah_G]

69. And everything you see between that and the city is extremely populated

Blue Hill is surrounded by very heavily populated smaller cities. It is only a couple miles from the city limits.There is no where for the deer to go to or even migrate through.

[NickB79]

73. No where for the deer to go? Deer LOVE suburbs

Here in the Twin Cities, the suburbs are densely populated with wildlife. Deer, geese, turkeys, coyotes, raccoon's, etc.

Unless the cities you are talking about are almost devoid of lawns and gardens, deer are there.

[Marrah_G]

75. These suburbs are like extensions of the city, it's very urban

I would imagine there would be a high death rate by cars and not so friendly run ins with humans, etc.

I love deer, I think they are beautiful, but the reality is they have zero predators here and the population has gotten wicked overgrown.

I would also like to add that population density is MUCH higher here then it is in the twin cities.

[truthisfreedom]

87. I have an apartment in St Louis Park as well as a house in extreme SE MN.

There's deer in both places, and they're hazards in both places. Just like the coyotes. And there's even more raccoons in the suburbs than I see in the wild! At nightfall they come pouring out of the storm sewer grates in the curbs.

[leftyladyfrommo]

64. We have a real deer problem here in KC.

When they have to thin the herds they call in sharp shooters. Not just regular hunters. It's very controlled and the meat all goes to the homeless shelters here in town.

[Eleanors38]

96. Pro sharp shooters usually are given a "shopping list" of which deer to kill...

and are required to field dress off-property or remove gut piles, and to have deer immediately delivered to processors. They are often equipped with night sighting gear, noise suppressors, and towers. All is cleared away in the a.m. when the first joggers & dogs hit the trails.

Traps and "darting" can be used, but there is significant mortality in the practice and when transporting deer to areas allegedly deer-poor; in the event, deer in strange covens suffer high mortality from coyotes, feral dogs, and starvation. And all of this is quite expensive compared with controlled hunts.