[The Bacon Guy]

Quote by: Matt Wrong, he studies group behaviors too, like, for example, men that cheat once have a much higher chance of doing it again then men that never cheated. Or that if you go on diets, loose alot of weight, there is a very good chance you'll gain it back. Those are group trends.

But they’re not trends in group behaviours; they’re trends in individual behaviours within a group. In other words, he’s looking at how one particular individual in a group will act based on his particular past actions, rather than looking at how society as a whole will progress based on its past actions.

Quote by: Matt Ok, it is unstustainable because (this is looking at it from a humans prespective....just to be clear): A) Deer hunting in places where the populations have been very high have only been semi-successful, some have not been successful at all

Then feel free to introduce wolves to work alongside the hunters.

Quote by: Matt B) Hunting is slowly going the way of the dodo bird, so in 50 years or so there wont be enough hunters to even attempt keeping the populations down.

Still no proof.

Quote by: Matt Natural predators are better because: A) They were meant to keep deer populations in check

That falsely assumes that there was intent behind the development of wolves.

Quote by: Matt B) They are not being destructive towards wilderness

Hunters aren’t necessarily going to be destructive to the wilderness either.

Quote by: Matt C) (this is from the deer's prespective) They will kill less deer

No. ONE wolf will kill less deer than ONE hunter. A group of wolves sufficient to keep the population of deer under control will kill MORE than a group of hunters sufficient to keep the population of deer under control.

Quote by: Matt D) They go after the weaker or sick deer

Which is why they will have to kill more deer in order to control the population.

Quote by: Matt When they are on their deathbed it wouldn't be the same 'will to live'.

You can’t prove that since, as we’ve already seen, you don’t have access to a deer’s mind.

Quote by: Matt Yes, they are, but in most areas the population of deer isn't overpopulated. When we are talking about hunting deer, I am not only talking about the places they are overpopulated, but also the places they are not overpopulated. If I just stuck to the latter one, my opinion would be easier to prove, though I'm not, because if we are talking about deer, it should be conclusive. Though you are only focussing on the few places they are really overpopulated.

Of course I am. I’m using an example to dispute the argument that all hunting is wrong or unnecessary.

Quote by: Matt No, actually not. When people are trying to keep populations down of certain animals, most times they do big culls all at once and kill many more deer then a wolf pack would probably in a years period. The wolves and cougars (over a couple year period) would get the deer populations back down to better levels, and the deer would not be starving in the places where they are overpopulated. They wouldn't try to get the deer populations down to what 'humans think is good' (which usually means if someone sees two deer on their lawn...its too many), they would get them down to a level which would be healthy for the wolves and cougars and the deer. They would kill less deer. Also, while lying in bed last night I was thinking about something. Are deer really overpopulated...or are they overpopulated because they interfere with us by eating our gardens and walking on the highway? The reason alot of them are starving is because we have taken away alot of their habitat, and with that their food sources. We have given them much less area to forage for food, and that is one of the reasons they are starving in some areas. I agree their populations seem high in some areas, but is it overpopulation?

Yes, because them straying onto human land is an indication that their own habitat is not sufficient for them. Hence, they are overpopulated.