Even deer populations may be damaged by hunting pressure. Unlike natural predators and the forces of natural selection, hunters do not target the weaker individuals in populations of deer or other animals.
Rather, deer hunters seek out the bucks that have the largest rack. This desire for "trophy sized" bucks can and has had detrimental effects on the health of deer herds. First, hunting can impact the social structure of a herd because hunters kill the mature males of a herd and create a disproportionate ratio of females to males. It is not uncommon to find a herd that has no bucks over the age of three. Second, genetically inferior bucks may be left to propagate the species, thereby weakening the overall health of the herd.
Because hunters largely want to shoot only bucks, hunting may cause artificial inflation of deer populations. When these populations reach levels that available habitat cannot support, increased disease and starvation may be the result.
Your education is sorely lacking.
Isn't it more humane to kill wildlife by hunting than to allow animals to starve?
As a matter of fact yes. The presumtion by the anti hunters is that the hunters do not selectively hunt the weak/starving ones. In reality, that point is moot, for the reason of hunting them is to thin the herd, not necessarily to shoot the infirm. As te herd is thinner, there is more forage to go around, and therefore the population as a whole lives on.
Pound for pound, and person for person, the hunters are (with few exceptions, the case in any statistical group) moch more conservation oriented, and it is/was through their efforts that many of the "hunted" animals are in fact doing so well in the wild.
If you do not like hunting, so be it. Hunters who shoot wildly and do not practice conservation turn me off. However, those who take their activity seriously, those who shoot to eat, and even those who shoot for trophies, as deemed so by the powers that be in order to thin out herds (because their natural predator has been removed) are well respected by myself.
I happen to love pheasent, and there are many, many around my home. We often place food out for them in the winter, and plant berries and grapes for them to hide in and nest, and, yes, to reproduce. I have no problem bagging one occasionally for a good family dinner. It tastes so much better than that butterball at safeway, stacked four deep and 20 long.
And you forgot, they only take one or two a year if they are successful at all. The percentage of tags filled that are bought each season are actually quite low.
Rather, deer hunters seek out the bucks that have the largest rack.
I agree there is a lot of emphasis put on trophy hunting. But trophy sized racks are VERY hard to come by and I sure wouldn't pass it up just because it's big, if it came my way. Usually by the time a deer has gotten to trophy size it has had a few years to spread its genes around. Also, many guides charge a lot more money to put you onto a trophy rack vs a management rack. I could never afford either, and the vast majority of hunters can't. Maybe once in their lives they will go on a guided hunt where the emphasis is on trophy racks. Many people that set up deer cameras on trails shoot pictures of bucks at night walking by with giant racks that otherwise are never seen by ANYONE anywhere in the area. So they *are* out there even if you don't see them. They are not stupid. I had a huge deer under me in the dark that has been glimpsed a very few times by the landowner as having 20 plus points and is nicknamed "the hereford." But every deer I know of that has been taken out of there in the last three years has been a doe.
First, hunting can impact the social structure of a herd because hunters kill the mature males of a herd and create a disproportionate ratio of females to males.
Yes this is called buck/doe ratio and the higher it is the more large bucks will be in the given area.
It is not uncommon to find a herd that has no bucks over the age of three.
This is true. But of what importance is that to non hunters?
Second, genetically inferior bucks may be left to propagate the species, thereby weakening the overall health of the herd.
I can't think of anyone that would pass up a goofy or weak-racked buck if it offered a shot. One thing we do like to do (at least until season is winding down) is to wait until a mature animal presents a shot, letting the younger ones go so they *will* have a chance to reproduce and contribute their genes to the pool. In addition, you get more meat off a mature buck than a mature doe. Substantially more. Bucks in the north can weigh close to 300 lbs where you won't find a doe weighing more than 180-200 tops. (I may even be overestimating the doe weight).
Because hunters largely want to shoot only bucks, hunting may cause artificial inflation of deer populations. When these populations reach levels that available habitat cannot support, increased disease and starvation may be the result.
Do you realize that in some places when the winters have been extremely bad, the DNR will severely limit the number and type of tags to compensate? People who live in that area are out of luck unless they want to travel to hunt.
Because hunters largely want to shoot only bucks, hunting may cause artificial inflation of deer populations. When these populations reach levels that available habitat cannot support, increased disease and starvation may be the result.
It is untrue that most hunters ONLY want to shoot bucks. State Game Wardens often limited deer hunts to bucks only as a way of increasing deer herds. Now, (I have heard) deer are more numerous in America than they were at the time the pilgrims landed. As a result, to the farmers of the midwest deer are laregly viewed as rats with antlers. I kill several deer a year...one for my freezer and one for my mothers freezer. While these are usually does, If I see a good buck I'll nail him, too. Nothin' wrong with having some hardware on the wall to look at while I'm chewin' on some venison.
As to dogs, I've killed several that were killing my chickens. You see sungirl, you PETA types who like those cute little puppies get tired of them when they pee on your fancy $5,000 carpet, so you drive them out to the country in your $50,000 jaguar and turn them loose. They get mean and hungry, try to kill my chickens, and I've got to kill them and bury them.
My daughter turns 16 this year. Going to get her first deer this year...and she's really excited about it. She's a great shot.....she can drop a prarie dog at 200 yards with that .243 of hers. Oh yeah...prarie dogs have cost me and my neighbors over $40,000 in the last 5 years in injured livestock...almost enough to buy one of them thar fancy jaguars.
I'm a hunter. And I love to fish. I love being outside whether it is on a stream, on a lake, or sitting quietly in a tree watching an awesome whitetail 15 yards away. My freezer is full of venison and a few trout.
A week ago, I found the remains of four deer that the coyotes had killed. Like me, they take everything they kill, and what they leave, another animal cleans up on.
Hunters have been contributing to a fund for over a hundred years that goes toward wildlife management. The money has been put to good use. Recently, a lawsuit was resolved in federal court. The lawsuit was filed by the Sierra Club in 1996. Seems they wanted to tie up money from a successful program with a 100-year track record.
Hunters know one thing: No matter how quiet the woods on opening day, there is someone, somewhere, plotting to put an end to any kind of enjoyment they find in a tradition that is older than our country. Put another way, no matter what you find fun, there is someone somewhere that will try to stop it.
Happy Hunting.
WRONG!
I'm sure you are well meaning, but unbelievably ignorant of deer hunting. Here in Kansas, the deer population is so out of control that for the last two years, we have been able to take six deer in a year. At least five of them have to be anterlerless, depending on if you're lucky to draw one buck tag.
I'm a meat hunter and could care less about antlers. Most of the hunters I know are the same. That doesn't mean we would pass up a nice buck, but we are just as happy with a doe. The farmers are happy to have us taking them too.
I used to be one of those bleeding heart anti-hunters too. That is until I learned a few facts and actually went out and did it. Now I don't miss an opening day of any season. So if you want to have an educated opinion on the matter, I suggest you go along on a hunt.