Seems to me that homo sapiens do more damage to planet Earth than any other mammal. Maybe we should hunt them.

I cannot believe you have not mentioned the only problem: eradication of predators which has caused population explosions of prey species. Reintroduce mountain lions in suburbia and across the rural landscape and the deer population will be better balanced. Hunters never prefer to understand this irrefutable fact, as if nature never balanced without their arsenal.

Ditto for wolves.

I agree with Kirk here, and anyone interested in the topic should read the book Where the Wild Things Were: life, death, and ecological wreckage in a land of vanishing predators by William Stolzenberg.

“And hunting is way down. Some say it’s time to bring hunting back, to strike the balance.”

It’s a sorry travesty that killing off part of the remaining ‘desperate nub’ can be called bringing things into ‘balance’. Balance?

It’s the human biomass with our giant footprint of housing, industry, agribusiness and infrastructure that are out of balance.

Far from them rubbing up against them we’re the ones rubbing up against wildlife as we develop farther from central cities. I’m always amazed and somewhat humored that some bug eyed Channel 7 news crew shows up to interview some blubbering woman after a Coyote takes off with her pet poodle FiFi. To get to her house they drive past a dozen road killed wildlife.

In my mind, this issue ties in with others of late. The decline of hunting is not the only cause of increased friction between wildlife and humans. Habitat infringement continues to be a critical factor, due in large part to this notion that a married couple and 2 kids need a house the size of Rhode Island.

The same ideology of big, bigger, better that brought down the stock market, ushered in the foreclosure crisis and threatens to bring down the credit system has also resulted in cul-de-sacs where there used to be woods. Don’t go back to sport hunting, live in a smaller house!

Stay on point, Tom.

Having worked in the wildlife area for 35 years in Africa, Alaska and near my home in the wilderness area where Iowa/Illinois and Wisconsin intersect, I can assure you that hunting as a harvesting tool of wildlife doesn’t work.

In fact, its economic benefit is negative.

As a revenue source for wildlife authorities and outfitters, it’s significant.
As a recreational activity, its economic benefit may be significant.

But as a harvesting tool, it doesn’t work and may even have opposite consequences.

And, by the way, there is something much more dangerous than growing wildlife in suburbs: teenagers. With their increase comes a greater increase in deaths (usually from traffic accidents), disease (usually STDs) and there are many more flower gardens trampled.

As someone who hunts and has advanced degrees in wildlife conservation/biology and urban planning, I want to point out that with the first two posted comments this thread has already degraded to something that will likley not lead to MEANINGFUL discussion and debate.

Unfortunately, hunters too often go after large bucks, and not does. So the deer population in my rural Iowa County has exploded in the past ten years. Predators would go after the old, sick and weak and control the population better. However, I do not want mountain lions on my farm.

Jim, do you mean effective “population control” vs “harvesting tool”? Most game agencies employ management strategies geared toward increasing populations (which contributes to the potential problem of over-population).

I’d be interested in hearing why you say it is an economic negative.

I want to bring up wildlife corridors which allow animals to move between human populated areas and lesson the interaction that happens because of human sprawl.
Go to http://www.vtfishandwildlife.com/cwp_elem_land_CHC.cfm

this is the Vermont corridors site

I am not sure if hunting is the right way to balance the needs of humans and wild creatures. I am pretty sure, however, that every carnivorous American should go hunting and participate in dressing the animal after the kill. Then they might rethink the barbarity of factory animal farming (from which those nice supermarket steaks and chickens come) and have a little more appreciation for hunting and its relative harmony with the natural world.

Humans have removed the predators from the natural eco-system/food chain, therefore, humans must make up the predation difference. Or, reintroduce predators, such as they have done in Idaho/Montana/Wyoming.

Otherwise, you get an out of control deer/elk population (like in Philadelphia area) that does serious damage to parks and private property (road kills) and an unhealthy, small, diseased herd.

Check out the University of Idaho College of Wildlife for excellent wildlife management philosophies.

In Iowa, we have a program for hunters of deer to donate kills to a local food bank. This offers another rationale for allowing hunting besides simply managing the herd by killing the animals.

I drove the same two mile stretch of I80 on the north side of Iowa City for 12 years. About 10 years ago, I was driving home from work and in the corner of my eye, I saw what I thought was a herd of cattle. Then I remembered that field was not farmed. Upon closer inspection, I saw that here were 90-100 deer in a tight cluster within 100 yards of a six-lane interstate highway.

At the time, the city was debating whether to allow bow-hunting to reduce the numbers. There were the usual outcries from well-meaning people.

It was only going to be a matter of time before someone died on that interstate and I wondered if those same protesters would be attending the funerals of the traffic fatalities.

I’m not a hunter and I think urban sprawl is out of control…but we have to be pragmatic in these situations.

Actually suburban development supports wildlife growth. Deer eat not in forests but on the EDGE of forests. Suburban yards are ideal food sources and more deer can exist in this environment and therefore they do. It’s not that their land habitat is being taken; beneficial habitat is actually being supplied!

University of Pennsylvania study reveals inconspicuous hosts in the Lyme disease epidemic

http://www.bio-medicine.org/medicine-news-1/University-of-Pennsylvania-study-reveals-inconspicuous-hosts-in-the-Lyme-disease-epidemic-7233-1/

Get out your .50 caliber pistols and lets go shoot some chipmunks.

Your show leads me to think about how we get food. The brutality of hunting is simply being honest about where our food comes from. In his book the Omnivore’s dilemma, Michael Pollan quotes Emerson who wrote, “You have just dined, and however scrupulously the slaughterhouse is concealed in the graceful distance of miles, there is complicity.”

I hunt pheasants very rarely and when it comes up in conversation with friends it usually surprises them that I am a “brute.” I ask if they’ve eaten chicken recently and the answer is almost always yes. Then I ask them just what they think had to happen for deboned chicken to be neatly wrapped in plastic and available at their local grocery store. I point out the hypocrisy of being a meat eater and giving hunters a bad name. I have the most respect for vegetarians who are almost always better conversationalists on the subject because they’ve thought it through. Most people haven’t

ok if that caller would have it, all wildlife would be isolated in parks or refuges. imagine a human population restricted to a small town. no new blood. inbreeding. disease, overbreeding of same families.
that is how it is for wildlife without some corridors to move and establish new families and not inbreed. chaos.

1. Hunters often go after trophy bucks – which means that they tend to counter the evolutionary model of a successful apex predator, ultimately weakening the deer as a species.

2. The UN’s GEO-4 conference declared reported that people currently demand 21.9 hectares of land per person – while the Earth can only support 15.7 hectares per person according to current populations. I know it’s unpopular, but people need to understand that “go forth and multiply” is no longer a fair or responsible mantra.

3. House cats vs. coyotes – This is a no brainer – cats are, taken objectively, an injurious invasive. Put bells on your cat if it has to go out. For sure spay or neuter.

Suburbia eats nature. Period. We should stop subsidizing it and nature will regain her balance while we save trillions of dollars of wasted money for subsidized suburban sprawl.

The deer did fine in balance with the mountain lions and wolves before your little suburb caused a shocking slaughter of all large predators and the predictable explosion of prey.

I’m not opposed to hunting for the reasons expressed on the show this morning.

However, in terms of getting out and enjoying nature, hunting may impede that for those of us who like to get into the woods in the fall to hike, mountain-bike or go horseback riding.

I keep a horse in New Hampshire and since the law allows hunting 7 days per week, I take my life in my hands when I go into the woods to ride.

In Maine, no hunting is permitted on Sundays.

It seems so important that such a law be enacted in other states so those who want to enjoy the woods without hunting, may do so at least one day per week.

One reason for hunting, especially deer, is to keep the populations of the prey animals down. This keeps diseases from infecting the domesticated herds.

Ah. I just heard a woman talking about this on air.

Let us not confuse what is natural with what is ethical. Hunting and meat eating are natural, but are not necessary or ethical. Hunters do not ‘control’ populations the way other predators do, as they kill the big, strong animals, rather than the sick and weak. If stewardship involves murder, I hope these folks are never my stewards!

Tradition is not an excuse for unethical behavior. Some traditions are better let go of, such as racism, sexism, and hopefully someday, speciesism. There are ways to spend time with family and enjoy nature without brutality.

Humans are by far the most overpopulated species on the planet; therefore, it is important to remember that the conflicts with wildlife are caused by people. This makes it our responsibility to handle these conflicts humanely.

would someone speak about sarah palin’s endorsement of hunting of wolves and their pups from helicopters?!!!

i spent the weekend in brimfield ma….
even though fertile land is very scarce …
there are no restriction on the number of farm animals one can own and keep on ones land ..

i hate human hunting of wildlife …
but i cannot blame the wildlife for coming out of the woods to snack on chickens and cats .

I’ve been hunting all my life, mostly with a bow. Most people cringe when they hear I enjoy hunting. I’m a psychiatrist, I’m highly educated, and somehow that makes me “better than that”.

I think that we as a society have been so far removed from life that we neglect the role of death in our food and survival when death is probably more essential to the modern life than ever in human history.

I think that hunting is far more respectful to wildlife and the ecosystem than buying SUV’s, big houses, or most things for that matter. It is becoming more and more difficult to find a balance between living in a natural world and having a healthy body and mind in a culture that devalues the basic, essential and primal elements of life. Without these elements, what is human?

On a practical note, I think if we are going to have more hunting we need more or better hunting education that promotes conservation and hunting practices that are sustainable.

Some human – animal conflicts are caused by people moving into wild areas. My rural Iowa county has NOT increased in population and suburban people (in our case) are not the problem.

Ten or twenty years ago it was rare to see deer. Now, most families have stories about hitting deer with their car on a highway.

http://www.guthriecounty.net

I am a geologist, a farmer, and a hunter living in Northern New York State. I hunt for food, processing my own meat by canning and use of a freezer. And yes, I do hunt hard for a nice buck. I do use doe tags but really, buck hunting is much more a challenge and it is that challenge that keeps me engaged. I do not trophy hunt for carnivores such as cats, coyotes, wolves or fishers, or any other predator for that matter. In fact, I do not agree with predator hunting and find it a sad mark on hunters and the art of hunting. A trouble animal is one thing, but to go out and hunt a predator for no good reason other than shooting is against my grain.

With that said, I do not believe that common sense, conscientious and legal hunting is a bad thing, in fact, I do believe that hunting is a part of who we are and to have some understanding of that process of life and death and subsistence is a good thing. I also know that hunting keeps the white tail deer herd healthy. Deer can destroy an ecosystem in a very short time, resulting in heavy winter die offs and even to crowding where mass wasting disease may get introduced. And whether anyone likes it or not there are not the predators to keep deer populations in check. I wish there were but, there aren’t.

I do not play god, I play human and my place on the food chain. A true hunter is a conservationist, a naturalist, a protector of healthy environments and ecosystems, a steward of natural resources, to include that resource for which she/he hunts.

Hunting done with a conscience, with humility, and with care is a very responsible and honorable way to be engaged in the natural world and it is a good reminder of where food comes from. Sadly, there will always be those people who abuse such privilege, but that shouldn’t mean that hunting is a bad thing.

Thank you.
Matt

I am not a hunter myself, but feel that it is a necessary tool to help manage animal populations that are no longer managed by natural top predators. It is important to remember that the few comments of hunters using automatic weapons, trespassing, or poaching are in the minority and people should not let a few bad apples taint their views. The majority are respectful, knowledgeable, conservation minded people who are happy to share what they know.

My other thought is that we are witnessing a major moose population boom in the northern VT, NH and ME and, while a deer may cause some damage to a car, a moose collision can be fatal. Something to think about.

The language of modern day hunting advocates is full of euphemisms: culling, stewardship, management, being in nature, etc. Reality check: It is KILLING for sport and recreation. It is taking a magnificent and innocent creature and snuffing out his or her life with a mighty blast, and feeling good about it.

I would have expected you to have a wildlife biologist on your show who is NOT a hunting lobbyist to present the opposing point of view and facts. You are talking about killing animals here, and since they cannot speak for themselves, you are obliged to have an animal advocate with expertise in wildlife to speak out.

Brian Vincent did a good job, but he was brought in towards the end and there was not an adequate amount of time and voice given to balance out the pro-hunting mentality of your other speakers.

I am not a hunter myself but I grew up in the country in upstate NY and have lived around and among hunters all my life. I also study environmental science. I believe that hunting by humans is healthy for humans, in terms of being able to see where our food comes from, in terms of increasing our food security, and in terms of increasing the general appreciation for nature among humans.

However, it’s clear to me that hunting by humans will never replace hunting by other predators as a means to keep prey populations healthy and in check.

So what should we do about this dilemma of too many wild animals wandering around the suburbs? The only solution I can see is for there to be less humans. I do believe that sooner or later there will be many fewer humans, but for now it’s taboo to talk about that. Alternatively, humans could get really creative about how they build houses, farms, towns, etc.–build up, not out, and use energy-efficient, space-efficient technologies for food production and transport.

Also, I second the call for wildlife corridors. Check out architect Malcolm Wells’ vision of earth-sheltered structures and covered roadways for one possible route to increasing wildlife habitat while still ensuring that humans have the infrastructure they need.

I am a new hunter. This is my second year hunting. Reading the comments and hearing the show I found that much of what folks said about hunters are misconceptions, partial truths and misunderstandings.

It is important to understand that there is a wide range of hunters out there. Many deer hunters will go seasons with out getting a deer. It is not like the deer are standing their ready to by killed. Once hunting season starts they do what they can to avoid contact with hunters.

It is a challenging activity and the reward is often the meditation and peace of being still in nature. All the hunters I know are interested in all aspects of the hunt. Filling the freezer and feeding our families is an important part of hunting. Most not all hunters I talk to honor the fallen deer and feel a mixer of satisfaction with a successful hunt and loss of a beautiful creature.

I am always puzzled by how folks place a higher regard for animals in the wild than the cows and pigs we slaughter daily. It mirrors the way we view people from one nationality or race as more valued than another because of their education or color of their skin.

Thanks for listening.

It was Market Hunting, not recreational hunting which caused the massive declines in species. This is what Roosevelt and Hunter-Conservation organizations pushed to outlaw.

We are part of the ecosystem. We have created the situation in which these animals reproduce to unnaturally high numbers. It is our responsibility to play our role as a top end predator.

Deer or other animals that die naturally do not do so on a morphine drip with classical music on the hospice stereo. They starve, die of illness, or are consumed alive by predators. Given the options, a hunter’s bullet is a very humane choice.

Ultimately, choosing not to hunt focuses on the temporary happiness of a individual animal at the expense of the longterm well being of the species.

I don’t hunt, but I all in favor of it.
For the people who want to bring back wolves and mountain lions, yeah that’s going to work. You have a lot of dairy farmers in these areas you might want to ask if it’s a good idea first.

Do you like goat cheese? Goats will be easy pray for these predators.

Please use common sense, reintroducing large predators in the North East would be a disaster and the wolves and lions would be the losers.

There are to many deer and moose, culling a heard is a good sound practice. Seasonal hunting is not culling herds.

If you want local farm produce to take off in New England, which I do so I can buy a decent head of organic lettuce, not one that has not been shipped in from California then culling deer herds is going to have to happen.

Every see what a 3 or 4 deer can do to a vegetable garden? It’s not pretty.

I advocate for common sense.

Mother nature has laid all her life forms on a competitive playing field, and shows no prejudice by valueing one over the other. The most complex “higher” mammal can be driven into extinction by the simplest virus. Nature is not cruel or kind, she’s indifferent. Assigning different values to different forms of life is a human practice, and every human will do it differently. The vegetarian will say its ok to kill plants, but not animals. The anti-hunter will tell you its ok to to kill animals, as long as they’re not mammals with brown eyes. “Julia” commented that killing animals was “unethical”, assuming that her definition of ethics was universal. This year I’ve killed bacteria, a number of various species of garden plants, trees, insects, worms, fish, ducks, geese, grouse, rabbits, squirrels, and deer. Does Julia have an 800 number people can call and find out where the line of “ethical” falls? I don’t trivialize the life of the deer, and am respectful of the life in a garden. I’ve killed these other life forms to sustain my own life, as all life forms do. When something kills me, I will be fertilizing one or more plant species. We are omnivores by design, not choice, and to question the omnivore killing and eating the herbivore is to question the sun rising and setting.

Without having listened to the show yet I already have an answer: Hell no!

Leave the poor animals alone! We need to stop terrorizing these creatures and begin acting more responsibly with regard to their well-being. Whatever the opposite solution is to hunting I’m all for that.

I am a hunter from the Upper Midwest. I will certainly concede the ethics point to anyone here who is vegan or vegetarian. Eating meat, period, presents some fairly serious ethical and moral quandaries. (However, if we are to eat meat, I think hunting is far more ethical than buying meat in a grocery store. It forces us to take a hard look, firsthand, at the fact things have to die every time we eat a steak or a cheeseburger. Secondly, I believe strongly that a hunted wild animal has lived a much more humane life than an animal raised in a pen for human consumption)

With that said, I am bewildered by those who are anti-hunting and also meat eaters. Does the fact that you have removed yourself from the food chain make you a better person? I would argue the opposite…

If you were a farmer you would why we need more hunters

first to cris nobb if you want to hunt homo-sapians fine, but do not be surprised when the murder charges are on you, how long was it before you flunked social studys and science… second grade maybe? next, kirk releasing a mountan lion in your back yard… ARE YOU MAD!!! if you do, when kids on your street dissapear the neigbors will form a mob outside of your house unless you live on a street where bad scrooge clones roam.

wow…more comments than the homosexual segment…anyway,… time to wipe out what I call the junk deer in the Northeast; they cause too much property damage and death and serve no environmental purpose…besides, we can always adjust the deer population later just like we did in the 60’s.

Let’s get down to the roots of this problem. Humans are definitely taking over habitats and we are the ultimate source to our problems. We need to build up and take a better control of urban and suburban design and put an end to sprawl. People need to stop being so selfish, materialistic, and feeling entitled. The best way to cure this problem is to control our population through education, acceptance of birth control and sterilization, and a change in perspective on the need to breed and baby entitlement. Sport hunting (not hunting for food) is a mask to this problem. Perhaps if people in the cities and burbs have more animal encounters, they might start to think about the environment.

For me hunting is a family activity getting out with my father and it’s nice to be able to gather my own meat. I live in MA an area that has seen a decrease in hunters over the last several years. As the biologist said, loss of habitat is the single largest threat to wildlife. Hunters have historically and continue to fund conservation efforts that help to protect places for many species of wildlife to live on through the revenue generated through hunting licenses and stamp fees.

One of the best examples of this is the Federal Duck stamp program. This stamp is required for waterfowl hunters and since 1937 has helped to protect the 90+ million acre national wildlife refuge system. Monies from these revenues are used in part by agencies to set aside land for wildlife and public recreation, including hunting. This is just one example of how hunters pay for conservation.

If anything I think we should be introducing more people to hunting today especially young people. There’s actually a theory today called nature deficit disorder. It’s discussed in Richard Luve’s (sp?) book Last Child i n the Woods. To me this is a sad, sad thing. Hunting is a great way for families to spend quality time together in the great outdoors. Many of our nations greatest conservationists early lessons in the outdoors came from hunting. In Walden, Thoreau wrote, “When some of my friends have asked me anxiously, about their boys, whether they should let them hunt, I have answered yes,- remembering that it was one of the best parts of my education.”

Maybe up in Canada a wolf killed someone, but back here in the US more people are shot in the face by Vice Presidents than are killed by wolves.
You can’t blame the Vice Presidents. They are usually confused and afraid, and we have encroached on a lot of the secret bunkers that make up their natural habitat.
I know something needs to be done but I’m conflicted. Somehow introducing large predators like bears and mountain lions in the the Washington DC suburbs and hoping that they will kill and dismember the surplus vice presidents is hard to stomach. And I am completely against hunting them from helicopters with automatic weapons and then just leaving the carcasses to rot.
Maybe less suburban sprawl would help. Meanwhile don’t anyone leave food out for them.

Hunting is a right of passage. Father to son for centuries. I am 49 and my son is 13 and he is taking hunter education here in Idaho. My dad took me hunting as did my grandfather. My grandfather homesteaded in NE Montana and hunted and trapped for a living in about 1920 there. He did do to feed his family and provide a living I hunt it all. Elk, deer, whitetail and mule, antelope, wild turkey, all birds that fly. I do not get an animal ever time I go out. I am one of the best things the State of Idaho has going for it conservation wise. I love to get out, I love to watch wildlife and learn from them. Here in Idaho the wolf is the hot topic. The wolves have done almost a well as wild turkeys here in Idaho. Problem there is the numbers of wolves are to great and they are effecting our elk herds. Idaho used to have one of the greated elk populations in the Rocky Mountians. They also have effected the cougars and livestock industry here. What do we do now. Stop hunting elk. The NWF and other groups would like to see that and stop all hunting. Wolves are being sought after because they are causing problems. They were hunted to near extinction in many areas because the farmers and ranchers can’t make a living with wolves there. My grandfather told me that when I was 13 years old. Canadien Timber Wolves killed his cows and sheep on the plains of NE Montana. Now it’s coming full circle again. Right now they have no fear of man because they can’t be hunted and it’s a federal crime to do so. But they are being hunted. Alaska has too many wolves. Go there and talk to guides about the real Alaska wolf problems. They are devistating the caribu and native deer there as well. People see them as ruining a part of Idaho. Dr. Randall Eaton of Wyoming has done two videos on hunting and you might like to look him up for a further conversation on hunting.

Jeff
Idaho

I am a hunter and young professional who now lives in the DC area, but grew up in PA. I’m astonished at the misinformed nature and backward thinking of urbanites on hunting and land management. People tend to label hunting as a brutal redneck practice that has no place in today’s society. The same people that live in my neighborhood have no problem buying a $20 steak at whole foods, but look down upon harvesting a deer. Hunters have a vested interest in preserving the natural beauty and curbing suburban development which would destroy habitat. Hunting is a necessary land management practice to preserve our natural beauty.

I have not hunted for over 20 years, but I am good at it. I have an apple orchard, so I am able to get an orchard permit, allowing me to hunt pretty much at will, if I wished. Here are some observations:
Hunters: Most hunters that I know shoot the first deer they see, not trophy bucks. Unfortunately, most hunters I know understand nature far better than the average “environmentalist”. At least they get out and enjoy the world and support environmental programs. Many people do not support environmental programs because they never experience nature. THIS is far more dangerous to our environment than hunters. However; as for hunter’s attitudes, if killing makes you feel like more of a man, you need to re-examine your life.
Vegetarians and Vegans: If you eat this way for your health and for general environmental health, hats off to you.
Animal rights activists – Do you have any idea how many animals are killed by plowing a field? Do you drive under 15 mph, so as not to smash bugs, bats, birds, and small mammals? And what do you do about mice, rats, and other vermin in your home? I am genuinely curious about that.
Small game: Hunting is usually not necessary to control small game. There are plenty of predators for them. Still, squirrels and rabbits taste good.
Large predators: Cougars do not mix well with the joggers, bicyclists, small children, pets, or livestock. Wolves need too much space to control deer in any populated area. Coyotes are rough on cats. A good thing in my opinion, as cats are environmental terrorists. And putting bells on the cats is a good idea. It lets the coyotes know where they are. Coyotes are also dangerous to small dogs and livestock and can only take out the most vulnerable deer. Attacks on children happen but are overly hyped.
Deer: Zoonotic diseases are not a huge issue, as Lyme disease is spread more frequently by rodents. Deer carry many diseases that are harmful to goats, alpacas, and llamas. I live on a road that is a car/deer arena. I have lost a friend to an accident. Deer significantly lower crop yields. They will also over populate and starve in rough winters. The population needs to be regulated, but as I have indicated, predation is not a viable option. Regulation could come in the form of professional hunters, paid to choose targets in accordance with good culling practices, that is IF anyone were willing to pay for the service. I should probably be more responsible and cull the herd myself, as I know every deer on my property, their habits, and their general health. I had two I should have disposed of last year, in fact, as they were either badly injured or diseased. And since I am only a few miles from the site of our state’s first Chronic Wasting Disease site, I feel particularly remiss for NOT getting a permit and shooting deer I knew to be ill.
Development: A double edged sword. Some species actually benefit from our presence, others, not so much. I agree, we needs to protect habitat and wildlife corridors are a must.
Meat as food: I think that if you enjoy meat, you should be able and willing to kill. Your food should be treated as well as possible up until the moment of it’s death. Factory farms are revolting in more ways than you can imagine.

Conclusion: Hunters are a necessary, if imperfect, solution to deer overpopulation. They are our best environmental stewards at this time (particularly game-bird hunters). They are more beneficial than harmful.

And, no, I don’t actually hate everyone.

I am a vegetarian but I do not hate hunters who go out and shoot animals to get their food or for culling. I’d be more critical of those who buy regular meat that comes from a factory farm which is unsustainable and an environmental disaster.

My one criticism is for pleasure hunting or internet hunting where one can kill animals through a website and mouse-controlled guns. I don’t know how widespread such online hunting sites are, but that to me is a sick concept.

I wonder how many of the anti-hunting, anti-urban sprawl, anti-population growth types are consistent enough to oppose all immigration, both legal and illegal. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if some of the knee-jerk liberals, anti-sprawl, and animal rights types are all for mass immigration.

Millard-fillmore,
Unfortunately, in the world of hunting, it is usually the bizarre that gets public attention. I can assure you that the vast majority of the hunting world was nauseated when someone suggested using a website to hunt animals, and as far as I know it never happened.

I think if most people opposed to hunting knew the reality of it (at least as I’ve experienced it), they would be much less opposed: That you sit in the freezing cold in the woods for days hoping to even glimpse a deer, that half the time, or better, you go home empty handed, and that often times a doe that will freeze the filler is just as great of a catch as a buck with a huge rack.

After listening last night to the show and now reading the posts I’m a little concerned. It seems that people who are anti-hunting are against it for no other reason except that they feel it is wrong. One post stated that no matter what the alternative to hunting was she was all for it. Another post wanted to re-introduce predators; black bears, lions and wolves. Although most black bears are less likely to kill other game species they are considered predators. I wonder if these people are really thinking clearly.

The problem is many faceted. Urban sprawl; moving into wildlife areas is only a part. Here in MA we have urbanized the landscape. With more housing developments the wildlife is forced into smaller areas. But also with the housing developments comes more people, people who do not want hunting in their town. So we have forced the wildlife into smaller areas and removed the only predators, hunters. This compounds the problem. For years MA hunters traveled to the western parts of the state to avoid the anti-hunting attitude in the east. Due to this the population of deer in the eastern part of the state has exploded.

The coyote population has increased in years as well. There are more prey for these predators to consume. There was a recent coyote attack in MA and the animal had to be put down. Granted those attacks are rare. I’m not going to play that one up, just mentioning it because eliminating hunting and increasing the predators will eventually lead to more attacks on humans and their livestock.

I personally think that MassWildlife does a good job of regulating the populations here in MA. They are the regulators and the hunters are their tools. To eliminate hunting would be disastrous. We would have population explosions which would lead to death from disease and famine. If the prey die off then the predators will need a new food source. If restrictions are needed then they should be implemented. Wildlife biologists have a tough job and my hat is off to them.

The problem we face is now, it is right in front of us. To curb urban sprawl or to prevent human population increases in the future will not resolve the current issue. And I do not think the US would want to do either. How do you prevent human population increases? We could create ‘zones’ for wildlife but w/out fences (and I abhor that idea) the wildlife would wander and roam. With fences you have nothing more than a zoo.

Like it or not hunters are needed. and hunting is a way of life for many Americans. It is a hobby, a recreation activity that many people enjoy. Although there has been an increase in “trophy hunting”, it is not the only hunting people partake in. There is a lot more to hunting than just killing. many hunters spend more time afield than environmentalists and naturalists. Most hunters are environmentalists and naturalists as well. Anti-hunters would do well to realize this. We’re just as concerned with the environment and it’s wildlife. We know when drought strikes and area, we recognize a good or bad mast crop season. We know how weather effects a species. We all research our environment and do our part to help maintain it. labeling us “killers” may make you feel better but it couldn’t be further from the truth. Hunters are Environmentalists.

also, Poaching was mentioned in the segment last night. Poaching is not hunting. Poaching and hunting should not be compared to each other.

I still stand my ground. I will continue to fish for sport. Granted I will re-think the fact that all God’s creatures are for our use including fish in Lakes or seas. Perhaps “catch & release” has its idiosyncracies.But I have seen many scientist,marine biologist and so on use this method in catching,tagging and then releasing the fish back into the water with little or no harm. Secondly I did contact “BIG Wild-Life” in Vancouver Canada and now they have another supporter for protecting big predators such as Cougar,Bear and so on from being hunted when it is not necessary. But back to sport hunters. I will grant the fact that yesterday I was opposed to all hunting et al with a gun. But though I do prefer that one use a “Bow & arrow” or even a spear like my ancestors did. This idea is probably not going to go over well with conventional weapon hunters. I heard lots of good arguments for sane hunting. And though I’d never hunt unless I was “forced” to do it for food or to protect myself or my family. I will not bad mouth them when I too am a hunter of fish. Thanx “On Point” for such spirited debate. With your ability to reach the US and the world it is nice to agree sometimes or to disagree without being disagreeable.

Your friend in Columbia South Carolina & Ex-Air Force Brat

Chip

”

“I think if most people opposed to hunting knew the reality of it (at least as I’ve experienced it), they would be much less opposed: That you sit in the freezing cold in the woods for days hoping to even glimpse a deer, that half the time, or better, you go home empty handed, and that often times a doe that will freeze the filler is just as great of a catch as a buck with a huge rack.”
_____

Right: We should be more concerned with the discomfort of the hunter, poor baby. Even though he more often than not goes home empty-hand, and usually alive, he also as often doesn’t get the payback of shooting an animal to death as excuse to pound his chest in proof that he is male and masculine, the entire raison d’etre for which latter is opportunity to pound one’s chest.

And then enhance that with boasting about it.

All that in order to make females swoon.

Right: We should be more concerned with the discomfort of the hunter, poor baby. Even though he more often than not goes home empty-hand, and usually alive, he also as often doesn’t get the payback of shooting an animal to death as excuse to pound his chest in proof that he is male and masculine, the entire raison d’etre for which latter is opportunity to pound one’s chest.

All that in order to make females swoon.
JNagarya

JNagarya I hope your a vegetarian, if not you should think before making such nasty comments.

If you love the deer so much why not move to a rural area and set up a deer farm. Spend all your hard earned money on feeding them. While your at it try growing your own food and I hope your smart enough to figure out how to keep the deer out of your garden.

The deer population needs to be culled, it’s necessary and prudent.

You bleeding hearts are to much, you go on about the deer because some childhood memory of Bambi or some other misguided BS.

I used to live in Vermont, in some parts of the state, such as the Northeast Kingdom there are plenty of women who hunt. Some people do it to survive. Again JNagarya if you eat as much as an egg bought in the supermarket your hypocrite when you criticize people who hunt for their food.

Although I may have missed it, I didn’t hear any discussion of using birth control for deer. There have been pilot projects, and one would like to know more about this humane method of controlling excess populations. Perhaps a wildlife expert from say, the Humane Society of the US, could have offered such alternatives. After all, the most stable societies among humans are those where birth control is widely practiced.

A deeply sad (to me) fact of life is that living beings have evolved as predator and prey. All sorts of things flow from this, such as aggression and various forms of violence, but that is an issue for another day. The only omnivore that has the capability of refraining from using other animals for food is the human. Since all killing of animals for food, whether in agriculture or hunting, involves violence and terror, many find the humane answer in vegetarianism.

Most urbanized people find hunting repugnant (apart from those who are really dependent on hunting for food) because, at its base, is the “thrill of the kill.” I never met a hunter who didn’t enjoy the actual killing and its attendant display. For all the talk about being one with nature, etc., that is what it’s fundamentally about. Hunters generally dismiss people who recoil from such blood pleasure as naive and wimpy, not able to face the fundamentals of existence.

A final word: to label animals as “resources,” like trees, copper, and other non-animate resources, is akin to dehumanizing the enemy, a typical desensitization tactic for populations at war. Wild animals are just as much individuals as dogs and cats, with unique intelligences and emotions, if we only had eyes to see and minds to understand. But we need have no qualms if they are just “resources” for our enjoyment and use.

Birth control for deer? Are you serious? It will never work. How many millions of deer are there? How many do you want to give this also? Deer are animals and not humans. Life the birth control to humans. Maybe you should try putting condoms on all of the bucks out there.

I’m guess the HSUS you are talking about is the animal rights group that is almost terriost like. Their experts will not help the animals in any way. It will actually hurt them. Too many of one specie can be bad for that animal (loss of food, sickness (chronic waste diease in deer for example) An example of this is the Canada goose and Snow Goose. There has been dieases because of the Canada goose poop in some area lakes around where I live in Minnesota that is harmful to people. Hunting seasons here haven’t even controled the numbers of them. Snow geese have destroyed farm land. The hundreds of them have cost farmers money. They have a spring season on them with no limits on trying to control the numbers.

I bet most people who haven’t hunted or anti’s (people who are agaisnt anything done with animals) don’t know the hours in getting ready for a day of hunting. I’m a waterfowler. We spend a lot of time and money scouting during the off season. Bringing in a lot of money in the area’s economy. People bring millions of dollars in the states economy.

If you knew the work on just shooting animal, you would know why we hunters are happy about it. It’s not that we are disrespectful to the game we are hunting.

Hunting and being in the outdoors (hiking, camping, fishing, etc) is a lot more healthier for kids then having them playing video games for hours on the couch eating junk foods.

People who hunt provide for their families not only food, but happiness through the year.

During this report, there was mention of penning of wild predator animals for the purpose of training hounds to hunt. I found myself screaming at the radio. The notion that we’d have to _train_ hounds to hunt is ridiculous. No one needs to do that. Hounds hunt by nature — it’s their greatest joy in life, aside from belly rubs. Ask anyone who has a beagle as a house pet or tries to keep a dachshund from digging.

Beagles and Dachhund’s are not large game hounds.

Traditionally they are large dogs like Wolfhounds and Foxhounds.

I own a Lab Pointer mix and he loves to track small animals.

Killed every mole in our backyard within a week of moving to a new house a few years ago. He would track them as they moved underground, fascinating to watch.

Its in the dashound nature to dig holes. My wife’s dashound does not dig holes. It was breed to hunt badgers in Germany. Training a dog is only help get to be better at what they are breed for.

We should learn to live with the animals. Let the lion lay down with the sheep and may peace rule the planet.
Wishful thinking.

This just in:

Blandford Nature Center in Grand Rapids, Michigan has allowed hunting on its property after the population exploded from 14 deer in 2001 to 130 now. Officials say the population could exceed 500 if something isn’t done.

In short, they are destroying the nature center.

I live in North eastern Conn, In my yard I have atlist eight deer in my yard every evening. I have deer, turkeys, bear. Coyotes on my property. Any deer shot on my land is eaten and enjoyed.

To take exception to the gentelmen who you intraviewed on the beginning of your show. The Passenger Pidgeon was not shot off but it was the clearing of the forest that really did in the pidgeon. But yes many of them were shot for the market.

I have hunted for over sixty years, and have shot very many deer, all were eaten and enjoyed.

My self and five of my neaibors have presurved 705 acres agaisnt development throug the forsty legacy program. this program is adminstered by the US Forestry dept.