Deer Birth Control--for Handwringers

[MrBenchley]

The loonies speak....

"Deer birth control projects are on the rise and constitute a real threat to hunting - especially bowhunting. Deer birth control was concocted by the animal rights movement, which sees it as a way to eliminate hunting in the long term. In the short term, the anti’s have focused their energies on urban deer management. Their campaign appears to be working.
Deer overpopulation has been, and continues to be, a growing problem in metropolitan parks and other urban areas. When park managers announce controlled hunts, the anti’s respond with a storm of publicity, stoking the public’s unfounded concerns over safety and cruelty to deer. Local officials quickly buckle to the pressure, and look for other solutions. The anti’s, of course, then offer deer birth control or sterilization as "humane" options.
In the past, state wildlife agencies would not issue permits for such projects, but public pressure from large urban centers has resulted in a surprising number of approvals during the past decade.
The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance recently conducted a survey of the fifty state wildlife agencies on the subject. The results were alarming. Eighteen deer birth control projects have been completed or are underway in California, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin. "

http://www.wild-about-trapping.com/news_and_alerts/news_049.htm

Imagine that...people in urban and suburban areas don't want armed loonies in their backyards.

It's especially funny to hear "The results were alarming."
Wasn't it just yesterday we were being told that hunting was a necessity for the deer's own welfare, not a gratuitous bit of sadistic fun?

[MrBenchley]

1. A somewhat saner perspective.....

"The vaccine, now in its experimental stage, comes none too soon. Deer have overrun suburbs across the country, spreading Lyme disease and destroying gardens and denuding trees that might otherwise shelter birds. But in densely populated areas, hunting is too dangerous or too unpopular, which is why the Humane Society of the United States got into the birth control business.
Every fall since 1993, researchers have ridden mountain bikes along Fire Island's boardwalks, shooting vaccine-laden darts into unsuspecting does. The vaccine, made of pig proteins, renders the animal infertile for the rutting season. The darts also splatter red-vinegar dye on the doe's rump to indicate that she has been treated.
The Humane Society jumped in after a disastrous archery hunt left deer wandering the boardwalks with arrows sticking out of their rumps. As a result, it never did get the sort of base count needed for a truly scientific study. But Brian Underwood, a biologist evaluating the project for the U.S. Geological Survey, says that in the section his team has been studying the longest, the deer population has fallen by more than half, from an estimated 128 in 1998 to 59 in 2001.
Underwood, the government evaluator, puts it this way: "The differences in results between culling and a humane program are substantial, but there are values attached to each one that people are willing to trade off. Is it worth waiting ? Depending on whom you ask, yes." "

http://magazine.audubon.org/webstories/deer_birth_control.html

[Emoto]

2. more from those articles

"It could take another 5 to 10 years to perfect the vaccine and win approval from government regulators for commercial sale. But the Humane Society's labor-intensive method--which costs about $1,000 per doe for the first two years of treatment"

"In 2000, Rutgers University reported that birth control projects are inefficient and expensive. State wildlife agency information reinforces those findings.

Statistics show that only 513 deer were treated during the studies. The cost was $1,509,739 – an average of $2,943 per deer!

Aside from the inflated cost, many of the projects simply did not work. Connecticut, Minnesota and Ohio all reported continued growth of deer numbers in the targeted areas. "

This looks like a big waste of money to me. The govnernment doesn't have unlimited funds. Every time another program is initiated, they reach into OUR pockets to pay for it. Is that really better than hunting that actually generates revenue? Plus, many tons of meat are donated by hunters every year to the needy. Where will that food come from now? Oh right, my pocket again. Great.

[MrBenchley]

3. Too too funny....

"Is that really better than hunting that actually generates revenue?"
Yeah? Is hunting going to generate enough revenue to pay for the California fire that hunter started? The Texas numbers showed that Texas paid a shitload more money adminstering hunting than hunters generated.

[alwynsw]

16. That doesn't wash

What about the hiker that started the Chedeski fire in AZ last year. He wasn't hunting? Check the stats. Not all hunters are model citizens, but then, doesn't that ring true for society as a whole?

You're grasping at straws, Benchy.

[MrBenchley]

17. So frigging what?

The claim was that hunters were a cost-benefit to society...which that one asswipe managed to cancel by himself.

If you want to piss and moan about other issues, be my guest...

[RossMcLochNess]

24. Geez, I hope you're never elected President...

under your rationale, all hunters should be abolished because of the actions of one. I, for one, will be checking my newspaper daily to see if anyone of my ethnic heritage committed a crime because if they did, you'd want to get rid of me and my family too because we're all bad, huh?

[MrBenchley]

31. Geeze, Ross...

Look at the pRresident the gun nuts and hunters gave us NOW....

""Were it not for your active involvement, it's safe to say my brother would not be president of the United States," Bush said."

http://www.jointogether.org/gv/news/summaries/reader/0,2061,563037,00.html

That was Jebbo, the other white meat...you got some goddamn nerve bitching about anybody else in the White House.

"I, for one, will be checking my newspaper daily to see if anyone of my ethnic heritage committed a crime because if they did, you'd want to get rid of me and my family too because we're all bad, huh? "
No, I leave racism to the RKBA crowd...you know, asswipes like Ted Nugent and Larry Pratt. All I did was point out what the real balance sheet on hunting's benefits includes.

By the way, this asswipe who killed seven and wiped out billions of dollars' worth of homes and property is going to get FINED. Bet we won't hear the RKBA loonies who were screaming for capital punishment moaning about that light sentence, will we?

[RossMcLochNess]

32. My point was...

that you're judging an entire group of people based on the actions of one. Which is faulty logic. Most people can clearly see that. And besides, do you know for a fact that if that man wasn't allowed to hunt, there's NO WAY POSSIBLE that he would have been in the woods hiking or enjoying the forest in some other way? You're sure of this? You've talked to him? He's assured you that he never goes in the woods to hike or do anything else?

[MrBenchley]

36. And my point was

that its idiotic to pretend hunting has any cost benefit to the country...unless you want to include the actual damage they do.. Which hunters never do.

Hell, hunters don't even want to count the actual cost to the taxpayer of adminstering the Fish & Game commission when they tote up the tally book....although most hunting programs end up costing taxpayers more than they bring in, and any "revenue" generated by hunters gets plowed right back into offsetting just some of the cost of hunting administration.

"do you know for a fact that if that man wasn't allowed to hunt, there's NO WAY POSSIBLE that he would have been in the woods hiking or enjoying the forest in some other way?"
Do YOU know for a fact he would have been? Do YOU know for a fact that his grandson won't some day be president of the US? Do YOU know for a fact his grandmother wasn't Annie Oakley?

I love how desperately the RKBA crowd starts spinning when they encounter an actual fact that intrudes on their fantasy world.

[RossMcLochNess]

42. "Some men you just can't reach"

"its idiotic to pretend hunting has any cost benefit to the country...unless you want to include the actual damage they do.. Which hunters never do."

Hunting has much cost benefit but you keep chosing to look the other way about it. License revenue across the United States is used to purchase, support, and preserve state lands. Without it, there'd be no guarantees that it couldn't be used for development. And to say that there is a Fish & Game Commission solely because of hunters and fisherman is incorrect too. Lets say that hunting and fishing become illegal. Who's going to need to be around to enforce these rules? Either we'd have to hire more policemen to patrol the woods and streams or we'd still have a Fish & Game Commission. Sure, it wouldn't be as large because there'd be no license revenue coming in to support it but it would still have to exist. If you could show me how much hunting "costs" the country, I'd love to see the numbers.


"Do YOU know for a fact he would have been? Do YOU know for a fact that his grandson won't some day be president of the US? Do YOU know for a fact his grandmother wasn't Annie Oakley?"

Nope, I don't. You proved my point exactly. I DON"T KNOW and neither do you. You can't say that the fires had anything to do with hunting. The fires were started by a PERSON not the activity that he was engaged in prior to setting the fire. The two things have NO relation at all.

"I love how desperately the RKBA crowd starts spinning when they encounter an actual fact that intrudes on their fantasy world."

What "fact" would that be? My eyes must be going bad because I didn't see any in that last post.

[MrBenchley]

55. Too frigging funny...

"Hunting has much cost benefit but you keep chosing to look the other way about it. "
You mean by actually including the cost? Yeah, that's why it is called cost benefit.

"You can't say that the fires had anything to do with hunting."
Who the hell are you trying to kid? The fires were STARTED by a numbnutz who went hunting, got lost, and set them off to guide rescuers. No matter how desperately you try to play "let's pretend" the FACT is the fire had everything to do with hunting.

If you want to fantasize he'd have been in the woods anyway....feel free. It'll fit right in with the rest of the RKBA fantasy world.

[RossMcLochNess]

64. Too frigging hysterical...

"You mean by actually including the cost? Yeah, that's why it is called cost benefit."

I'm sorry but just because you think its terrible to shoot deer, it doesn't change the fact that the revenue created by hunting (licenses, equipment, etc.) far outweigh any negatives. Get over it. You keep saying the same things without backing any of it up. NOTHING. Put your money where you're mouth is and prove me wrong. I keep asking but you just can't seem to do it without resorting to repeating your "opinion" over and over again. The facts contradict your "opinion". I'm sorry but its true.


"the FACT is the fire had everything to do with hunting."

In who's world? Yours? This is just a ridiculous statement. Do me a favor and start a thread using this line as a subject heading and see what others tell you. I won't even get in on it. Most people will probably think its a joke because its so untrue and not based on reality. I know you hate hunting and hunters but lying doesn't help your cause. It actually hurts it which is why the anti-hunters can't seem to push their agenda very far. People can see right through it.


"If you want to fantasize he'd have been in the woods anyway....feel free. It'll fit right in with the rest of the RKBA fantasy world."

Oops. My bad. I forgot that you know the man personally and talked to him about it. You're 100% certain. Its a fact. I thought we went over this already? One more time... you can't say with any certainty whatsoever that he wouldn't have just like I can't say with any certainty that he would have. I already used your words to prove my point. Must I do it again?

[MrBenchley]

68. Who the hell are you trying to kid

" it doesn't change the fact that the revenue created by hunting (licenses, equipment, etc.) far outweigh any negatives."
Not even close to true...unless as you do, you ignore ALL the cost. Most hunting "revenue" doesn't even cover the cost of administering the hunting.

"You keep saying the same things without backing any of it up."
On the contrary. I have been backing up everything I say. You're the one that wants to play let's pretend--let's pretend the hunter didn't start the fire, let's pretend he could have been in the woods for something else.

And in this world, this asswipe WAS hunting in the woods and started the most costly and damaging fire in California's history. if you want to pretend that if he hadn't been hunting he would have still been in the woods, you can be just as silly as you like. Why don't you start fantasizing what he would have had if he'd had a picnic?

[juancarlos]

72. Correction:

"And in this world, this asswipe WAS hunting in the woods..."

It should read, "...this asswipe lunatic..."

[MrBenchley]

73. You would know, Juan...

[op6203]

97. HA HA HA!!!

"I have been backing up everything I say."

Go peddle that somewhere else....

Thanks for the laugh,
OP

[beevul]

Hahahaha

"Look at the pRresident the gun nuts and hunters gave us NOW...."


That would be more accurately phrased like this:

"Look at the pRresident the gun nuts and hunters voted for because a publicly vocal minority of anti-gunners didn't want them in the Democratic Party."


"No, I leave racism to the RKBA crowd...you know, asswipes like Ted Nugent and Larry Pratt."

Yaeh, and they leave a different freedom hateing role to the gun grabbers.

[MrBenchley]

41. Too TOO funny, beev....

You're trying to tell us that these gun nuts and hunters really oppose everything this unelected drunk stands for, but feared that they would lose their fetish object?

"they leave a different freedom hateing role"
Funny...who was that opposing the drug raid on that high school in South Carolina the other day...it sure wasn't any of the gun rights groups in Carolina, none of whom have jackshit to say about that bit of freedom "hateing."

But who is it supporting the students' lawsuit about that raid? Why, it's "gun grabber" Jesse Jackson.

But then of course, most of the students are black...and it's pretty clear this "gun rights" horsecrap is just good old fashioned bigotry with a new sheet to hide under.

[beevul]

81. Umm no.

"You're trying to tell us that these gun nuts and hunters really oppose everything this unelected drunk stands for, but feared that they would lose their fetish object?"

I'm trying to tell you that there are alot of folks who would otherwise vote Democrat if it weren't for a verry small vocal group of gun haters that smear the image of the party.

"Funny...who was that opposing the drug raid on that high school in South Carolina the other day...it sure wasn't any of the gun rights groups in Carolina, none of whom have jackshit to say about that bit of freedom "hateing."

Can you post a link that gun rights groups in Carolina support the raid please?

"But who is it supporting the students' lawsuit about that raid? Why, it's "gun grabber" Jesse Jackson."

Really? Is he a gun grabber? Cite please.

"But then of course, most of the students are black...and it's pretty clear this "gun rights" horsecrap is just good old fashioned bigotry with a new sheet to hide under."

Whats pretty clear, is that you will say anything no matter how desperate, to attempt to demonize anything even remotely pro-gun, such as this poor attempt to tie pro-gunners to racism.

Gee, I bet you couldn't find any anti-gunners on an anti-gun board condemning that raid iether. Or condemning anti-gay or anti-abortion views either.:eyes:

[MrBenchley]

84. Oh yes.

and Wayne LaPierre is queen of the May

"I'm trying to tell you that there are alot of folks who would otherwise vote Democrat if it weren't for a verry small vocal group of gun haters that smear the image of the party."
Yeah, surrrrrrrrrrrre.

"Can you post a link that gun rights groups in Carolina support the raid please?"
You first, beev. Let's see the ones OPPOSING the raid. I'm sure they have plenty of horseshit about how much they love freedom, how much they love their popguns, and how the two go hand in hand.

Larry Pratt sure lumps Jesse Jackson in as a "gun grabber." Of course he's a racist imbecile...but so are most people who spout terms like "gun grabber. " Jackson supports the Million Mom March...

http://www.commondreams.org/views/051400-101.htm

Here's Jackson on the subject: "Ask your mother whether it makes sense that a convicted felon like Buford Forrow, Jr., the white supremacist who fired on the children at day camp in Grenada Hills, Calif., was able to buy deadly weapons at a flea market. Explain to your mother why we license and register drivers and cars, but don't demand the same when it comes to gun buyers and guns. "
That sure sounds like rhetoric that would send the RKBA crowd here into their usual raging hysteria.

"Whats pretty clear, is that you will say anything no matter how desperate, to attempt to demonize anything even remotely pro-gun,"
Beev...YOU were the one who spouted off this crap about freedom "hateing"....and now it's clear all you got as evidence is dick.

It doesn't take any effort to "demonize" the gun rights movement because it's rotten from stem to stern and filled with scummy characters like Tom DeLay and Ted Nugent. What you're finding tough sledding is spinning away what an ugly mess it really is.

[alwynsw]

92. Apologies for the delay in replying

i had to attend an out of town funeral for a family member yesterday.

To say that the reason for the fire was directly linked to hunting is absurd. If your logic holds true, we need to close all wilderness areas and open lands to humans - period. Campfires left unattended or improperly extinguished by hikers and campers who are not hunting also start wildfires. Cigarette butts carelessly disposed of start willfires. malfunctioning or non-existent spark arrestors on mowers, trimmers, and chainsaws start wildfires. Catalytic converters on vehicles get hot enough to ignite fires if the vehicle is parked on dry grass or leaves. Let's not forget sparks from static electricity. The plastic bag, bucket, groundsheet, etc. that some thoughtless human leaves behind can cause a static buildup in windy conditions, thereby causing a spark to start a wildfire - it's happened. (If you've ever seen desert, or even western mountain grass you can understand how a single spark can do the deed.)

So, we've banned humans from the open lands. Now what are we going to do about that pesky lightning.

[MrBenchley]

93. Too TOO frigging funny

How desperately is the RKBA crowd going to spin to try and get around the FACT that a hunter started the worst fire in California history?

Yeah,other fires have other causes. THIS ONE DIDN'T.

And DO let us know next time you see the National Meteorology Association claiming lightning produces revenue.

[Name removed]

94. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Valarauko]

106. The fire that who started?

When did they prove it?

[CO Liberal]

107. They Didn't HAVE To Prove It

A hunter ADMITTED that he set a signal fire which caused the wildfire.

[Superfly]

4. Correction:

"Imagine that...people in urban and suburban areas don't want armed loonies in their backyards."

Bench, I prefer the term "asswipe lunatics", thank you very much.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RossMcLochNess]

6. Okay, then answer me this...

Lets assume that you get your way and hunting is outlawed. No more hunting of deer. We'll manage the deer population entirely with birth control. In the first two "non-hunting" years, we'll need to sterilize at least 75% of the doe population or roughly 11,250,000 doe. Based on the Audubon Society's estimated cost numbers, ($1,000 over two years) on the low end the country would be spending 11.250 billion to acheive this. On the high end based on the actual numbers that have come back so far ($2,943 per dear) we'd need 33.109 billion to achieve this. Okay, here's my question for ya Bench, where will the country come up with between 11.250 and 33.109 billion to control the deer population. And keep in mind, we're only talking about deer here. Not about any other animal species which I would assume you're also against hunting. Where will this money come from? I'm interested to hear opinions on how we can fiscally justify doing this. And keep in mind too, that its an ongoing process, not a one time deal.

[MrBenchley]

10. What I find funniest

is that gun nuts spend as much time telling me what I think as they do telling me what they think.

Did I say that ONLY birth control should be used? No. What I have said is that the hunting interests are bitterly opposed to even researching the question (you will note that Audobon also said current costs could be reduced) or exploring other methods. In Pennsylvania, for example, the Fish & Game commission has outlawed deer birth control AND refuse to consider any research on the subject.

And I have also noted that even as hunters shriek and point too overpopulation as the rationale for their barbaric "sport", they're also busily farming deer for their fun on the sly.

By the way, how many billions did the fire that idiotic lost hunter in California started cost the taxpayer? (not to mention the 15 people killed and the thousands of homes destroyed) If I was you guys, I wouldn't bring up cost....

[RossMcLochNess]

18. You didn't answer my question

I'm not telling you what to think. Its obvious that you have strong opinions on the subject. What I'm asking you, and others with your opinions on the subject, to do is do a little research. For two days now, I've been asking why its "wrong" to hunt. The only reply that I've heard is that "because you shouldn't do it for fun". I agree wholeheartedly with that statement. Unfortunately, that refers to a very small amount of the population and specifically, NOT ME AT ALL. That answer is totally dodging the question. Over the past two days, you have not given me a reason why beyond "you only do it for fun". I still have yet to hear a single FACTUAL reason why I shouldn't be hunting. If I could find any reasons or have them pointed out to me regarding why I shouldn't, then perhaps I wouldn't. But none have come forth.

And in this question, I politely asked someone to come up with some ideas on how to pay for it. I got none. I am curious to hear what other methods you'd propose to use in addition to birth control that could perhaps bring the cost of this project down?

Out of curiousity, could you provide me a link to where a lost hunter is blamed for starting the wildfires? The news was originally reporting that it was started by someone tossing a cigarette out the window then I never heard any more about it. Also, keep in mind that there were two fires that converged to make it as large as it was. The second fire, which was larger was an act of arson. This they're sure of. So, to blame the whole fire and all of the destruction on the hunter (if it even was a hunter) is not correct. Its another example of using half the facts to prove a point.

[MrBenchley]

25. Next ask me....

"For two days now, I've been asking why its "wrong" to hunt. The only reply that I've heard is that "because you shouldn't do it for fun". I agree wholeheartedly with that statement. Unfortunately, that refers to a very small amount of the population and specifically, NOT ME AT ALL."
Yeah, we know, you're doing it out of your strong sense that animals were secretly asking to have bullet holes....

"Out of curiousity, could you provide me a link to where a lost hunter is blamed for starting the wildfires?"

Sure. Wonder if he had fun while he was out...

"CEDAR FIRE
Acreage: well over 150,000 including 25,000 within the city of San Diego.
Structures burned: 150 in Scripps Ranch, 10 in Tierrasanta, 368 spread across Ramona, Lakeside and East County.
Deaths:At least seven. Four died in Lakeside, and three died on the Barona Indian Reservation. Two other people taken to trauma centers died of fire injuries but it was not clear from which fire they were transported.
Injured: 2 firefighters, several civilians
Firefighters on scene:1000+
Aircraft: 2
Containment: None
Start: 5:37 p.m. Oct. 25 between Julian and Ramona
Cause: Authorities believe a hunter set signal fire when he got lost."

http://appalachia.outdoors.org/bbs/messageview.cfm?catid=4&threadid=4069

"CEDAR FIRE, San Diego County: 14 people dead, 2,232 homes, 22 commercial properties and 566 outbuildings destroyed, 280,293 acres burned. Death toll includes one firefighter. Started Oct. 25, apparently by lost hunter setting a signal fire. Contained. "

http://www.nctimes.com/special_reports/fire2003/

"The Cedar fire, raging in the dry foothills 30 miles east of the city of San Diego, has grown in four days from big to bigger to biggest - the most destructive fire in the history of California. And yesterday it claimed the life of a fire fighter and critically injured two others.
The fire, which may have started after a lost hunter lit a fire to draw attention to his location, has consumed 233,192 acres, 960 homes and displaced thousands."

http://www.ohio.com/mld/ohio/news/nation/7134530.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp

[RossMcLochNess]

37. Congratulations!!!!

You answered my question about the wildfires. I stand corrected regarding the cause of one of the 4 fires. But keep in mind, the fact that a hunter started it with a signal fire has nothing to do with a discussion on the rights and wrongs of hunting. Because of course, anyone who was in the woods for any reason on that day and got lost could have done the same thing and started the fire. The fact that he was hunting has NOTHING to do with the cause. The cause was the signal fire being set by a person, not the activity the person was engaging in. This is clearly obvious.

And don't worry, I won't ask you anymore to answer my question on why I shouldn't hunt. I figure that I gave you 4 or 5 chances to answer it but you couldn't. I would have thought that you anti-hunters would at least have one talking point but I guess I was wrong. Oh well. That's life. Though I do appreciate you questioning and attacking my integrity and saying that I was lying while you were in the process of dodging the question. It speaks volumes about youself to me and others I'm sure.

[slackmaster]

83. OT - I live in San Diego and am very familiar with the fire situation

I've been an active Sierra Club member for over 20 years and spend a good deal of time in the varied backcountry of San Diego and Imperial counties.

The fact that he was hunting has NOTHING to do with the cause. The cause was the signal fire being set by a person, not the activity the person was engaging in. This is clearly obvious.

True. BTW the unfortunate, hapless individual who is credited with starting the Cedar Fire has not been charged with any crimes and is not facing any civil fines at this time. That fire was bound to happen sooner or later - parts of the burned area had last burned in the Laguna Fire of 1970, which I remember well, and most of it much longer ago than that. Had the person with the flare not started the fire it would have been sparked by lightning or an illegal campfire or a carelessly discarded cigarette butt.

Every square inch of San Diego County has burned several times in the last thousand years. That is the natural order of things here.

[RoeBear]

23. Like a dog with a bone...

...GRRRRR! Once you find, what you think, is a great bone you just won't put it down. I'm referring to your farmed deer spiel. Farmed deer are such a little piece of the pie when it comes to hunting that it's hardly worth the effort disussing it.

But I will agree that research on birth control for deer is a worth while thing to pursue. (come to think of it maybe farmed deer will be needed to do this research) If I could toss a few bucks worth of deer feed that contained an effective contraceptive for deer I would do it.
Until then I'll have to continue to invite hunters on my property to help protect my crops.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[alwynsw]

13. Are your doe numbers a little low?

And therefore the estimates for birth control costs low as well? I was told by my local game warden that we have an estimated 800,000 whitetail does in Kentucky. Extrapolate that over the states of equal or greater area than KY in which whitetail are indigenous, assuming roughly and equal number of deer per square mile, and I believe the number may be much higher.

Just a question from the top of my head. I suppose we could abolish hunting and raise taxes to pay for Planned Bambi Parenthood, but isn't almost every state in a serious budget shortfall as we speak? I'd rather hunt and have my taxes go to things more worthwhile.

[RossMcLochNess]

21. I was using the estimated nationwide population of 30 million deer...

and broke it down evenly 50/50. Yeah, the figure could be higher but regardless, I haven't heard anyone come up with a reason how we could justify the cost. Even at my perhaps low figure, birth control still doesn't make any sense.

[MrSandman]

108. You can't break it down 50/50

because very few males live to be 3 years-old. It is why "bucks only" seasons have failed in population control. Now there is a valid analogy between hunting and fires, but not causal. Hunters and game managers have been so indoctrinated--its not the right word, but it is close, indoctrinated implies a nefarious purpose--against killing does, that they resist.

Fire has been so successfully by the Smoky Bear campaign that land management agencies have made fire exclusion such an immutable policy, they have failed to consider that some ecologies depend on fire. Exclusion of fire within these ecologies increase the extent of the INEVITABLE fire.

How many of those homes were destroyed because the chosse to build in an area known to be subject to wildfires?

And are land managers also to be castigated because o forest ranger started a fire in CO, last year by burning a letter breakinfg a romantic relationship?

[el_gato]

7. it's a stupid idea

with dangerous implications for wildlife populations
playing god instead of being human

morally bankrupt in every sense

[RossMcLochNess]

8. Couldn't agree with you more

n/t

[Superfly]

9. Agreed 100%

...

[alwynsw]

20. One more agreement weighing in

Let's look at this from the PETA (a true bunch of loonies if ever I saw one) point of view.

Would you arbitrarily deprive the deer of their reproductive rights jsut because you can?

Before you fire back with the PETA view on hunting, bear in mind that they seem to forget that humans are mammals/animals that just happen to be at the top of the food chain. PETA doesn't fault lower forms for using tools to harvest their food - gulls breaking clamshells with rocks or monkeys "fishing" for termites with moistened sticks, for example - so whhy fault humans for using tools -guns - to harvest food - other animals?

[RossMcLochNess]

28. Well said

n/t

[MrBenchley]

11. Well, that clinches it....

if Gato says so....after all he's the one that says opposing what AshKKKroft wants is giving AshKKKroft more power, while parroting exactly what AshKKKroft says while waving your popgun around is a principled stand against the forces of tyranny.

[Superfly]

12. Funny you should mention that...

"giving AshKKKroft more power"

-What exactly have you and others been screaming from the rooftops for the past however many months? You want the FBI, ATF, etc (to have more power to pry into peoples' lives for the purposes of your twisted views on gun control....

[MrBenchley]

14. Remind us again what AshKKKroft says about gun rights?

Oh, yeah, the racist piece of shit is the chief purveyor of that bogus crrap.

[Superfly]

15. Yeah...and you want to give him MORE power?

:shrug:

[MrBenchley]

19. RKBA "logic", I guess

OPPOSING AshKKKroft's idiotic lies and dishonest policies is somehow giving him more power...while parroting the gibberish he spouts and pimping for the lobby he represents is not.

Sure glad I ain't got a speck of what's rattling around in the RKBA crowd's head.

[Superfly]

22. Let me lay it on the line for you....

Opposing Asskroft is one thing, but saying you want to give more power to the organizations he owns (ATF, FBI, etc) to push your gun control agenda....well, the two just don't jive, Bench.

[alwynsw]

27. Dupe on my part

I'm off to do my pallbearer duties and wish godspeed to my cousin who passed away.

Keep up the good work, guys. I'll be out of the asswipe lunatic frontline for the rest of the day.

on edit: There's no "e" at the end of pallbearer

[Superfly]

29. Condolences.

I'm sorry for your loss.

[alwynsw]

30. Thank you - and to all who may post after I leave

Now I really gotta run. It's a 3 hour drive and the funeral is in less than 4 hours.

[MrBenchley]

38. You can roll it up if you want

It's still horsecrap.

"you want to give more power to the organizations he owns (ATF, FBI, etc)"
Uh, hello? Last time I looked, the attorney general doesn't "own" jackshit....nor is he appointed for life.

[Superfly]

40. Well, you better look again.

You might want to take your head out of the sand and realize that Asscrap is the boss' boss for all those organizations....

[MrBenchley]

43. And when was he appointed for life, fly?

Are you trying to tell us we're never going to have an honest attorney general of the U.S.?

P.S.: If he's such a piece of shit, what does that say about the gun rights rubbish he peddles? Go on, you can tell us...

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MrBenchley]

47. Spin all you want ,fly

I'm not the one who claimed this corrupt piece of shit "owned" anything. I'm also not the one pimping his idioticc agennda and dishonest "gun rights" crap.

"gun rights, as has always been my position (whether that jives with Asscraps, I do not know)"
Jeeze, take a guess, fly.

By the way, the word is "jibes."

[Superfly]

49. "Owns" it's a euphamism, a figure of speech...

and yes, he "owns" those agencies. He's "in charge" of those agencies. How many other ways do you want me to say it?

If his gun rights platform jives with mine, so be it. Doesn't mean I am going to change my position because that is something we share.

[Name removed]

61. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MrBenchley]

65. Too TOO funny...

Adn what is he trying to do with those agencies? Why, force them to follow his idiotic and dishonest gun rights agenda.

[Superfly]

67. So, why do YOU, Mr Anti-gun, want to give him more power?

Hmmmm? :shrug:

[MrBenchley]

69. Too frigging funny....

So rolling over and doing exactly as he wishes and parroting this diseased idiot's rhetoric, as YOU do, is taking away his power...whereas actually opposing him is giving him more?

Who the hell are you trying to kid? Even more to the point, who do you think is going to be stupid enough to buy that rubbish?

[el_gato]

46. pull your head out of the sand bench

come out of the gundgeon take a look around you
the corporate fascists are in control
and your issue is costing us sorely needed support

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Superfly]

66. I never said anything to that effect.

I never said anything to that effect. Who knows what's going to happen with Asscrap in the next year, or, God forbid, if he and his boss get re-elected for another 4 years.

Regardless, we have seen that Asscrap is a very capable person when it comes to infringing on your rights in the name of security or whatever the reason du Jour is.

Secondly, gun rights, as has always been my position (whether that jives with Asscraps, I do not know), along with free speech rights are the most important rights, and they are rights I am not willing to compromise, whether for security or so MrBenchley can sleep at night (you know, there are millions of asswipe lunatics who are out for him...).

[beevul]

35. Heh

If you turn away hunters, sportsman and law abiding gun owners, you have noone to blame but yourself and your agenda, when they join the NRA. Noone to blame but yourself and your agenda when our party loses again. Noone to blame but yourself and your agenda for AshKKKroft getting more power.

Noone to blame but the anti-gunners and the anti-gun agenda for giving repugs that "gun grabber" stick they have repeatedly beaten us with.

Just ask Bill Clinton:

Remarks By The President
In State Of The Union Address
U.S. Capitol
January 24, 1995

"The last Congress also passed the Brady Bill and, in the crime bill, the ban on 19 assault weapons. I don't think it's a secret to anybody in this room that several members of the last Congress who voted for that aren't here tonight because they voted for it."

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1996/resources/sotu/full.texts/1995.html

I know, I know...its a false quote...and......that right wing CNN....they're not to be trusted. :eyes:



Even if they vote third party, we still lose.

Anyone have a link to how many of that "last congress" might have lost because of thier vote?

[CO Liberal]

33. The Biggest Problem With Deer Birth Control.....

...is getting the bucks to remember to use the condoms.

:-)

[MrBenchley]

34. LOL!

[RoeBear]

60. What did the doe say when she came out of the woods?

"That's the last time I do that for a couple of bucks!"

[CO Liberal]

63. Good One, RoeBear.....

Did you hear the one about the bear that had sex with a giraffe? A couple of his friends put him up to it.

:-)

[RoeBear]

70. How about this one...

...If peanuts are priced at $1.59, where are deer nuts?


Just under a buck.

[CO Liberal]

71. A Freeper Was Out Hunting......

...and a naked woman jumped out from behind a tree.

Freeper: "Are you game?"

Naked Woman: "Yes."

So he shot her.......

[RoeBear]

74. That was good too...

...thanks.

[CO Liberal]

75. Two Freepers Went Bear Hunting

As they were driving along, they saw a sign that said "BEAR LEFT."

So they turned around and went home.

[RoeBear]

77. Two armed lunatics went hunting...

... up in a tree to their hiding spot.As they reached the top the one hunter fell off. So the other hunter dailed 911. The operator on the other line picked up and asked what was was wrong so he told her,he said " he looks dead" and she said "go make sure first". So he said hold on and then she heard a gun shot. He came back to the phone and said "okay,now what?".

More---http://www.joketransit.com/jokes_category.php?cat_id=32

[CO Liberal]

80. Two Other Freepers Went Hunting

One accidentally shot the other and took him to the hospital. At the hospital emergency room, the doctor came out to the waiting room after working on the shot Freeper for a while.

Doctor: "Are you here with the hunter who was shot?"

Freeper: "Yes, I am. How is he?"

Doctor: "I hate to have to tell you this, but he died."

Freeper "Oh, that's terrible!!"

Doctor: "Well, we might have been able to save him if you hadn't gutted him before you brought him in....."

[alwynsw]

90. Isn't the punch line to that...

but the state caved in to a bunch of loonies protesting their fellow citizen's attempt to engage in their legal right, so they had to go home?

[Stilgar]

100. I dont think it will be remembering, I think

It would be trying to put it on with hoofs.

[LARED]

39. Nice spin on the "the results were alarming" comment

If you actually read the article it is alarming to hunters becuase;

Statistics show that only 513 deer were treated during the studies. The cost was $1,509,739 – an average of $2,943 per deer!

Three grand is a lot so the anti hunting folks can sleep with a smile oin their face knowing hard earned tax dollar are going to projects with little or no success. Of couse the deer will just starve to death. But hey, as long as your sleeping away in your dream world enjoy. r

many of the projects simply did not work

Now here's a great idea. Dump millions of dollar into schemes that don't work.


Of greater concern than the effectiveness of the treatments is the safety of the birth control drugs. Regardless of their effectiveness, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has not approved them for human consumption.

Contrary to your view that hunters just like killing things we eat the deer. I for one would rather eat it without the extras.

[MrBenchley]

50. Sez you....

Funny though, how the "alarming" comment followed the part about states studying the solution and not the cost part.

[Name removed]

54. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

57. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LARED]

59. Is reading comprehension a difficulty?

Here's the rest

The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance recently conducted a survey of the fifty state wildlife agencies on the subject. The results were alarming. Eighteen deer birth control projects have been completed or are underway in California, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin.

In 2000, Rutgers University reported that birth control projects are inefficient and expensive. State wildlife agency information reinforces those findings.

Statistics show that only 513 deer were treated during the studies. The cost was $1,509,739 – an average of $2,943 per deer!

Aside from the inflated cost, many of the projects simply did not work. Connecticut, Minnesota and Ohio all reported continued growth of deer numbers in the targeted areas.

I'll just ignore your attempted spin/diversion by changing the topic to projected cost from costs.

You really are slipping.

[MrBenchley]

62. Evidently it is for you.

"The results were alarming. Eighteen deer birth control projects have been completed or are underway in California, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin. "

[LARED]

78. You get an A for effort MrBenchly

But spinning yourself out of this is not going to be possible. Now really make my day by telling me you don't give a shit.

[MrBenchley]

79. Spinning myself out of what?

These pinheads are NOT alarmed about the cost. Their alarm is that those states are conducting studies on the subject. Now you can spin until you're blue in the face, but it's not going to move the sentence from its place in the paragraph.

[LARED]

82. I guess you really believe that

But no does the article indicate that what it means.

Is English your native tongue? I only ask because there was a fellow DU's that I misunderstood because English was his second language and he would often misinterpret what he read.

[MrBenchley]

85. The article really says that...no matter how hard you spin

"But no does the article indicate that what it means.
Is English your native tongue? I only ask because there was a fellow DU's that I misunderstood because English was his second language"
Too TOO funny.....

[LARED]

86. That actually was funny

Come'on MrBenchly, I admitted that I goofed up. How about you? I'm told confession is good for the soul.

[MrBenchley]

87. Yeah, you goofed up

and the paragraph says exactly what I said it says.

[LARED]

88. Lets try again

the paragraph

The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance recently conducted a survey of the fifty state wildlife agencies on the subject. The results were alarming. Eighteen deer birth control projects have been completed or are underway in California, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin.

Now you beleive and have stated that "their alarm is that those states are conducting studies on the subject." Yet, the statement CLEARLY states the results were alarming. The article then continues to tell why the RESULTS of the studies are alarming.

Nice try.

[MrBenchley]

89. Spin and spin

but you still can't spin away the paragraph...the results that are alarming is the results of their survey....that showed that states were daring to conduct studies that might interfere with their iodiotic and barbaric "fun."

[LARED]

102. So

the alarming results showed that state were daring to conduct surveys.

Very funny.

[MrBenchley]

103. Yeah, it is...

That's EXACTLY what they said, and that's EXACTLY what you've been desperately trying to spin away.

Never rule out gun nuts' proclivity to provide unintentional hilarity.....

[1a2b3c]

104. also

Never rule out the anti-freedom nuts proclivity to provid unintentional hillarity.....

[MrBenchley]

109. Pro-gun turds like DeLay and Lott?

Yeah, they pop up in the Conservative Idiots list on DU all the time...as does the NRA...

[LARED]

105. That's not what it said

and you can attempt to spin it till the cows come home, but the basic rules of the English language don't change because you either misrepresented or misunderstood what was written and can't bring yourself to admit it.

You are certainly entitled to your own opinions, but facts are facts.

[MrBenchley]

110. That's exactly what it said....

The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance recently conducted a survey of the fifty state wildlife agencies on the subject. The results were alarming. Eighteen deer birth control projects have been completed or are underway in California, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin. "

No matter how frantically you spin, the sentence before "alarming" is about the survey...and the sentencce with the results of the survey follow "alarming."

"the basic rules of the English language don't change"
No, but maybe you can get these asswipes to revise their press release....

[Liberal Classic]

45. $64,000 question

Do you support a nationwide ban on all hunting/trapping?

[MrBenchley]

51. Trapping definitely

For hunting I'd settle for more scrutiny, regulation and enforcement.

[Superfly]

52. Is that all?

I thought you'd be pushing for DNA samples, fingerprints, eye-scans, GPS trackers, and a government chaparrone for each hunter.

[Liberal Classic]

53. Fair enough

Just curious as to where you stood.

[LARED]

58. We both live in NJ

Hunting is already pretty heavly regulated in NJ. Enforcement in terms of fines and suspensions are considered pretty tough by most hunters I know.

Below are the regs. I would love to see how you would improve them.

http://www.state.nj.us/dep/fgw/dighnt03.htm

[RoeBear]

76. Who'd you tell your password to?

Whenever I ask you a question you respond with "who are you trying to kid?" or something like that.

Trapping is the weak link of the outdoor sports. Very few participants to support it. But I don't know how else we would ever control animals like beavers.

[alwynsw]

91. Clarify trapping.

Do I have to dump my Roach Motel?

[alwynsw]

95. I see that you're spinning again, Benchy

The following is taken from the same Humboldt study that you used a portion of in your "Hunters and Conservation" post:

Contraception can be expected to be most effective when all of the following apply:



1. Social issues dictate that culling is not an acceptable solution (urban / suburban areas or parks where hunting is not an option)

2. Money is available to fund the project at an effective level

3. A very large proportion of a small population (optimally < 200) is detectable and able to be captured

4. The population is fairly closed so that a high proportion of the population can be treated without worry of excessive immigration - e.g. little may be gained if you create a dispersal sink by decreasing reproduction in a small part of a large continuous population. This is also a potential problem with culling.

5. The species is a “K” selected species that produces few young each season.

6. Preliminary testing is sufficient to allow predictions of how the population and the community may respond.



Contraception can be expected to fail when:

1. Insufficient money is available to fund the project at an effective level

2. The population is large and continuous

3. An unknown proportion of the population is detectable and / or able to be captured

4. The intrinsic rate of growth of the population is high.

5. Preliminary testing is insufficient to allow predictions of how the population and the community may respond.

If you follow this to it's logical conclusion, birth control for deer is virtually unmanageable.

I don't understand. This study, which you regard a part of highly enough to bolster your position also contains the portion quoted above, which clearly states that the proposed birth control project is unworkable. That portion clearly contradicts your premise for this post.

Using your logic, gleaned from other posts, that something flawed in part is flawed in whole, which is evidentely a product of your flawed generalizations - e.g. all gun owners are scum, hunters are lunatic asswipes - why would you use an obviously flawed document to support you position?

[Stilgar]

99. Just because it wont work

Doesnt stop him from trying to mislead people.

Doesn't enter his head that hunters like to hunt because they like the outdoors and guns as well. To pay $25 for a permit and some ammo and if your lucky, kill a big deer that can be cut and frozen into huge steaks to be used throughout the year. If nothing was found, most hunters still have had a good day out in the woods.

Now we get to pay more for this and other conservation efforts without the hunters fees to help offset the usual costs. With the added benifit of this scheme not working if they dont pull it off just right.

[RossMcLochNess]

96. Did my part for deer birth control this morning...

I shot a 9 point here in Pennsylvania. Beautiful deer, 24 inch spread. And the best part is he'll taste better than he looks!!!!

[op6203]

98. Congratulations...

but I always thought medium-sized does tasted the best. ;)
OP

[alwynsw]

101. Good for you!

I'll be over for dinner!

[Moderator]

111. locking thread

it's too big Captain

I can't hold it much longer