Thread: Hunting Debate
View Single Post
Old Apr 9, 2008, 09:44 pm   #48 (permalink) (top)
The Bacon Guy
Brb, France
 
The Bacon Guy's Avatar
 
Location: Scotland, Central Lowlands
Posts: 2,865
Quote:
Quote by: Matt
Most hunters go for the biggest bucks with the nicest antlers, its well known.
So again we go from "hunters" to "most hunters".

And like I said, if we want to curb the deer population, killing off the larger bucks who are likely to mate more wouldn't be a bad idea.

Quote:
Quote by: Matt
The natural predators will keep the deer in check, aslong as we don't keep killing the predators and ruining their habitat. It may not be instant, but it will eventually work, if people are patient.
And it will only happen if we go to the trouble of introducing, monitoring and protecting the predator species in question. Why bother with all that when we can have fun killing the deer ourselves?

Quote:
Quote by: Matt
Then please tell me how people all across the USA are complaining about overpopulations of deer?
If that's the case, then we're obviously not killing enough of them...the deer, that is; not the people.

Quote:
Quote by: Matt
The hunting culls haven't worked that well, and they wont in the long run since eventually people will become more civilized and wont hunt. We need to think of a long term solution.
Only if society progresses towards your own particular concept of civilization. I see no reason to believe that it will.

Quote:
Quote by: Matt
BTW, what do you consider overpopulation?
An ecological definition would be the point at which the population of an organism exceeds its habitat's ability to provide sufficient resources. Another definition would be the point at which the population of an organism is large enough for it to cause problems to humans. Either definition is acceptable to me.
The Bacon Guy is offline   Reply With Quote