HuntingEd

I think he's mocking your spelling of breeding in the thread title....

TexasOaks

So you are saying without hunting deer populations would be in check and that natural causes, natural predators, diseases, and accidents would take care of everything to control deer populations. I just don't see that happening.

DUMB BASS

Read the title of your post, and the big red word you typed in the quote... You bread your heard.

My point is you have an issue w/ folks using HORN in lieu of ANTLER, but you don't use BRED (BREED) or HERD correctly.

TexasOaks

How did I not use it correctly? Gotcha my spelling.

TexasOaks

What would happen if hunting was outlawed and they were not any hunters anymore?

The consequences wouldthat many species would multiply completely out of control and completely destroy habitat, pushing other species to extinction. Agood example is the present impact of elk on Rocky Mountain National Park, whereelk are nothunted.

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_5339957,00.html

HuntingBry

SwampCollie, where do you get these facts from? The reason that I ask is that numerous studies that I have seen show that hunting not only has a drastic impact on the population of whitetail deer, but mis-management of hunting can have a serious impact as well. Not only that, but due to hunting which has caused the decline of the majority of the natural predators of the whitetail (i.e. mountain lions, wolves, and in some cases bears) the herds would not be kept in check and would go well beyond the carrying capacity of the land. Yes, some deer would die of starvation, but there would still be vast overpopulation and a very unhealthy herd. There is one herd in particular that is very close to where I live that is in this very state due to no hunting being allowed in that area. I think you would be surprised how many stariving deer can survive. However, I think there is a big difference between living and surviving.

SwampCollie

So what I am gathering here is that you are out to disprove the theory of nature returning to equilibrium...is that where you are at?

Hunting prevents"over-population." In areas where there are far in excess the number of animals the land can sustain. Hunting, in this case, is brought on in the form of massive concentrated efforts, like VA's urban archery program, which runs from Sept 1 through March 31. Its little more than culling. In that sense....hunters are preventing mother nature from restoring the balance her own way...which is by disease, predators......etc etc.....

HuntingBry

Not hunters, but humans. We have already screwed things up enough in the past with our ignorance that it would take mother naturea very long timeto recover from what we have done. If somehow we were completely taken out of the picture the deer population would explode and in time lead to disease and predators would return with perhaps some new ones being introduced. Yes, mother nature would restore balance, but this would take millenia to happen if not longer.

SwampCollie

We are pretty much sayin' the same thing here. Only different...if you follow me.

It wouldn't take millenia to happen. CWD can wipe out populations of deer just like Ebola or Bubonic Plauge can wipe out humans. For the earth to completely return to equilibrium...yes...it would take milenia. But it would take hie on 20 years for the deer population to come back down.

As to carrying capacity....doe's have to be healthy themselves to breed healthy offspring. If your deer heard becomes unhealthy, breeding success and fawn success will automatically go down. That in and of itself will help level the populations. Disease passes easily from one deer to another when they are constantly in close quarters with each other (such as bait piles). Heck...even in Northern VA, the deer heard is not in excess of the "carrying capacity", its just that no one can drive anywhere without running over deer. No one can grow a garden, or have a soccer game...for the deer being litterally EVERYWHERE. Planes cannot land....etc etc. People cannot do the things they want to do. This, in effect, lists the herd in excess...and thats why its being shot down by the deer depredation teams.

Yes, there is a big difference between starving and living....but there is also a big difference between malnourished and starving. Starving deer cannot survive. If they are living on...then they are malnourished. Starving is a terminal verb. Malnourished is a condition of life.

I encourage you to re-read my first post, I did infact say that hunting, if unchecked, will effect the population of animals. However, sport hunting (which is what all of us do for the most part), will not. And that is by design.

As to where the facts come from....Just take a look in your old hunter's safety manual and find the diagram of the over-flowing stock tank. Hunting in general does not have a major impact on populations, unless the game departments see it fit too. Thats when the seasons get opened longer, and doe tags get passed out like candy on halloween.

Diesel77

lol, we all mispell sometimes but thats some funny stuff right there,

DA, you missed the word "contril" TO mispelled also, hehe Im just bustin your chops TO, I honestly like reading your posts.