“This is not about "healthy environment" to "benefit" the animals its to "benefit" the wildlife killing community and thus with the abundance of deer causing high deer vehicle accidents. …”
Putting aside the question whether hunting is done for the benefit of the animals-habitat or to the benefit of the killing community of hunters, the questions still remains:
What is better for the deer and habitat/environment and other animals that depend on the same habitat? More forage (nutrition) available per deer, healthier does and higher reproductive success with healthier fawns, or less nutritious forage, unhealthier does with fewer struggling fawns? The ability to stay alive longer with malnutrition and disease or be killed by human-induced acute death (with less suffering than torn and eaten alive) method?
Some people say more happy (more healthy and with more nutritious feed) deer is better, even if overall more will be killed, than fewer unhappy unhealthy deer struggling to survive and then dying in painful ways (nature's way of killing over time). Some people say because numerically more ‘happy’/healthy deer will be killed it’s a bad thing.
“Deer can thrive well the way nature intented not with mass killing …”
But, the nature of Nature has changed for deer since we arrived and increased our population numbers and our land-use activities. With a severe reduction in nonhuman animal predators and the explosive growth in “edge” areas bordering deer’s woodland habitat, many deer are now free from the constraints of nature, particularly the predator-prey relation which kept deer numbers in check and in relative good health and so their habitat in good health as well. Acute mortality factors have drastically disappeared. Largely only chronic death methods exist to keep deer in check. Sometimes nature does manage to kill off deer in time and remaining deer can reproduce with strong progeny and there’s time enough for habitat to restore itself to its healthful state. But, there are also examples where overbrowsing has taken place and whole layers of habitat obliterated, with a cascading effect on other animals and the deer populations not coming back to thrive. Kaibab plateau’s mule deer debacle, where hunting was banned and predators all but wiped out, is often used as a textbook example. In many land spaces where predators are few deer populations can get incredibly high, because nature can’t reduce the deer fast enough without predators or a really bad winter/drought, and wildlife management doesn’t want to take the risk of letting nature take its course any longer in case habitat can’t replenish itself or deer numbers get too dangerously low.
“and using CRE to produce more deer with "high quality" food (which is also not "natural" part of wildlife) just so you can "produce" more deer for killing.”
Why is high quality food not a natural part of wildlife? By high quality food I mean thriving and plentiful natural deer food, like browse (oak leaves and acorns, hawthorns, yaupon, wild cherry and plum and grape, dogwood, elm, honeysuckle, walnut, greenbriar, etc.), forbs (partridge pea, tickclovers, clover, wild onions, wild lettuce, snoutbean, etc.) and grasses (wintergrass, sedges, rushes, wild rye, rushes, etc). I’m referring to the trees, shrubs, vines and some grasses that are part of the deer’s home range habitat and what they need for nutrition and health. I’m not referring to cultivated corn and soya beans, nor even deer management purpose-planted food plots.
When food is plentiful and of quality one is, I think, more likely to have more deer, anyway.
“There is nothing "caring" about growing deer for sports killing leaving thousands wounded and crippled every year. In Wisconsin in 2008 hunters did not recover 68,000 wounded deer? How about the other hunting states how many did they leave behind??”
Even out of 453,000 deer killed 68,000 wounded and not recovered is too much. . I don’t know the numbers and I don’t know how much is from unethical hunting practice (i.e., careless aims and laziness in tracking a shot deer). My understanding is that every hunter has a moral obligation to track a wounded animal s/he has hit as far as s/he reasonably can. But, there are times when one has genuinely exhausted all reasonable possibilities. Unrecovered wounded deer has been a problem in my state, too. Since 1997 we’ve had the practice of leashed dog trackers, a group of people who hold a license to search for wounded big game with the aide of a leashed dog. Hunters are urged to call upon a tracker (and game warden needs to be called and landowner permission if needed) sooner than later when they can’t find a deer they’ve hit. I have not followed up to find out whether the use of leashed dogs has been significantly beneficial.
“Plus remember the human lives lost from deer vehicle accidents. Its better not for the deer to be produced for hunting opporutunities and keep the number of deer low with IC deer birth control and to stop the food plots and lethal killing.”
Deer populations will grow anyway until they crash, either by mother nature or by human hunting. As they grow, deer-vehicle accidents will occur. My concern is that, given the current situation of human encroachment and our elimination or drastic reduction in nonhuman animal predators, if mother nature continues to control deer populations, there’s sure possibility that in some areas deer populations will crash so low where it can’t recover with habitat so destroyed that it can’t recover. So we need to ask ourselves do we want healthy habitat and deer in perpetuity, which means human intervention through hunting (a management tool that can cause deer overabundance, but its not the only factor in deer population increases – and hunting can also cause drastic decreases in deer, sometimes when a hunting program is really bad it can cause deer underpopulation to the point of putting future deer pop in jeapardy) or do we risk what mother nature throws at deer with the possibility of not having a deer population. Again, though possible for confined herds, existing IC fertility control methods are way too stressful on larger free-roaming deer, and too many logistical, monetary, and medical/safety problems including problems of effectiveness (too effective leading to too few deer that can reproduce and smaller gene pool. Or, under effective, where not enough deer receive the contraceptive, or where deer pass on resistance to IC to their offspring). IC birth control may be a non-lethal alternative, but not existing methods.
Again, hunting, depending on how it is used by game management dept, can produce both deer overpopulation or deer underpopulation.
“People like you make all the excuses that deer are going to die this "horrible death" unless sports wildlife killers are there to kill them "ethically" which we all know that is the biggest crock.”
Most hunter kills I assume (from reading hunting literature, and based on your Wisconsin link and other stats I've seen) are ethically done, in the sense of relatively instantaneous death. That is not to diminish your claim (the Wisconsin figure you gave) that there are unacceptable levels of unethical deaths committed by certain hunting practices.
Can someone still provide me the answer as to why "deer management" website always uses the words pertaining to "adding" deer if its about "reduction" because so far an answer that should be very simple was never given. Come now if its about "reduction" we should not be seeing words such as "produce" , "provide", "fawn recruits", "fawn crops", "restoration " (of deer that is), "kill varmints that are a threat to the "recruits", "provide for millions of hunters every year" etc etc etc. I have posted the same question at least 3 times already and everyone been dancing around it. Here I will give it to you again
"Some people disagree with shooting antlerless deer; they reason that protecting them -- thus maintaining a maximum breeding base -- will assure large numbers of antlered bucks because terrific numbers of deer will be born each year
and button bucks wouldn't be harvested. "PA. Game Commission
"Thus, late fall up to early winter is very important for deer herd managers to impact and influence fawn production
, so make sure the plant communities on your property is properly managed deer habitat. " Deer Hunting and Management TX
"Historically in all states, including West Virginia, hunting regulation have been restrictive during the period of deer restoration with mainly short buck-only season to protect does and encourage deer population growth." Fundamentals of Deer Management W. VA.
Here is more that I have collected and even the "carrying capacity" chart I found on QDM website talks about "low recruitment" when its "above carrying capacity". Wow, why would they even consider "recruitment" at all if its about deer herd "reduction" because of Deer Vehicle Accident injuries and death and deer overpopulation , "starvation" etc.? http://mathew5-7.blogspot.com/2009/08/t ... -deer.html
So take your time to read and then you can give me the answer that you have never given me yet and remember that in Iowa with deer overpopulation and high DVA's they are using "QDM" for "deer management" and they are big in hunting. I am thinking of leaving a comment or two at that link you gave me and I don't need to sign up for it..yeah
Here is your "instantaneous death"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dp2ILyJQl4
So many left wounded and crippled and all you do is make excuses and lies and your comment are a broken record the same old, same old of "ethically kill" that I hear from other wildlife serial killers.
Here is a story of a boy who hit wounded deer over the head with a tree limb to "end the suffering"http://www.theleafchronicle.com/article ... with-stick
"Situations like Borden's are not uncommon — though his method of putting the deer down was certainly unconventional. Dale Grandstaff, an officer with the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency, said the agency often fields calls from residents who have a wounded deer on their property because a hunter didn't finish the job
Yup lots of "ethical" hunters out all right. There is something terribly wrong with humans who enjoy killing and call it "sports" so the words "ethic" will never fit into what these sports wildlife killers do.
BTW the wounded deer video was put together last night me. I spend many hours even at work helping our wildlife and to expose the truth to the public.