OR-7 heads into California -- the first wolf to return to the Golden State since 1924

[bbqboy]

not at all. got any? That was supposed to say 6 lines. Good enough for you?
Nicely done though.

[Larry]

not at all. got any? That was supposed to say 6 lines. Good enough for you?
Nicely done though.

Actually, no. It's not good enough for me. You have a hard on against me, and I can't help that. What I can do is what I have been doing. I rarely take your bait and respond to anything you say. I will continue to do that with a bit more vigilance.

[bbqboy]

No, I care about you, but in your absence you have become a symbol of all that is fucked up about our country.
You used to be a fun guy.
Don't pat yourself on the back too much. Your arms aren't long enough.

[Larry]

No, I care about you, but in your absence you have become a symbol of all that is fucked up about our country.
You used to be a fun guy.
Don't pat yourself on the back too much. Your arms aren't long enough.

My absence is due to my efforts to support those who are doing what they can to unfuck what you and those like you have done to fuck up our country. It's exhausting, but rewarding work.

Wanna get back to the decimating ecological effects of unfettered predators?

[Wonky]

Too bad.
Kinda sad.

I think the OR-7 wolf (and others) are interesting. This is "an issue" I know almost nothing about, and because I know Larry is an outdoorsman and very involved in the ethics of game hunting, I wanted his take on this.

He did start to provide some information and then things started going downhill.

I've heard very detailed and complex arguments about management of wildlife, and from the little I've been able to learn hunting contributes to that proper management. Maybe there are other ways too.

I can imagine that a wolf population larger than is "normal" could wreck havoc. But, I think I'd like to see some natural wolves in our Oregon countryside just because the beauty of wild animals are a wonder.

So, I'd be interested in a more "kind and gentle" conversation here, hoping to learn something about this.

Larry, I hope you can find time to add what you know about wildlife management. As you said, "of course there is a place for them". I'm wondering just what that means.

[PonderThis]

In museums, stuffed.

[Wonky]

In museums, stuffed.

You forgot to add the smiley face showing your were joking.

Here:

[PonderThis]

I'm tired, sort of drunk, and not up to dealing with Larry tonight. See you in the morning.

[PonderThis]

My absence is due to my efforts to support those who are doing what they can to unfuck what you and those like you have done to fuck up our country.

Encouraging religious hate and sending your family off to do religious and corporate battle isn't considered beneficial by many of us.

[PonderThis]

from the little I've been able to learn hunting contributes to that proper management.

And who told you that? Hunters?

I doubt any of you asked the animals. This is as ridiculous a statement to make as saying humans would benefit from a little thinning of the herd. Well, that's maybe not so ridiculous an idea afterall.

[gapper]

from the little I've been able to learn hunting contributes to that proper management.

And who told you that? Hunters?

Ask anyone in wildlife management.
You are good at being a sarcastic internet forum junkie, but your knowledge of wildlife management seems to be zip, based on what you write.

[PonderThis]

That's because "wildlife management" is a euphemism for divvying up the spoils for hunters. Animals did just fine before human hunters came along, and they'll do just fine when human hunters are gone too. This notion that animals "need" to be killed for their own benefit is pure poppycock, you know it, and I know it.

Now, if you want to talk about things like sustainable harvest, or the money derived from hunting and fishing licenses and how it's spent, we might have basis for discussion.

To be fair, I know you derive your income from the hunting and fishing trade. No reason to make this personal, but you don't come at this from a particularly unbiased angle here. I, on the other hand, do.

Thank you for complimenting my sarcastic internet forum junkie skills, however.

[bbqboy]

[gapper]

Ponder,

You know much less about wildlife management or me than you seem to think you do.
That's OK, most internet junkies are wrong most of the time.

You should take heart of your own signature line rather than spreading non-facts and attempting to offer no proof.

"In fairness we ought to fight our case with no help beyond the bare facts - nothing should matter except the proof of those facts.....".

[PonderThis]

Well, post us some links telling us why animals prefer that we kill them versus letting them live then. I'd like to see something scientific that isn't biased towards providing hunters with more things to shoot, actually. By all means, have at it.

p.s. You could start with wolves.

[gapper]

Well, post us some links telling us why animals prefer that we kill them versus letting them live then. I'd like to see something scientific that isn't biased towards providing hunters with more things to shoot, actually. By all means, have at it.

Post some links telling us they don't. Post links telling us they would like to starve to death from over population and lack of habitat rather than being harvested by hunters.

It is you that tout "facts" and "proof" in your signature line, show us proof that animals have the reasoning power you are attempting to say they have.

Then, show us proof you know what I do for a living as you say in your attempt to out this poster, against forum rules. Let's see your proof, Ponder.
And, why attempt to make this personal by making false statements about me, then follow up with "no reason to make this personal."?? "Sounds a little goofus to me.".

[PonderThis]

http://www.idausa.org/facts/hunting.html

Exerpt: "Hunting, the stalking and killing of animals, has been an American tradition most likely since the Ice Age when plant food became scarce. Today it exists as a "sport"; even when the animals' flesh is eaten, there is no excuse or justification for stalking and killing an animal in his or her habitat. Nevertheless, people not only engage in hunting but strongly defend it as their right to do so. With an arsenal of rifles, shotguns, muzzleloaders, handguns, bows and arrows, hunters kill more than 200 million animals yearly - crippling, orphaning, and harassing millions more. The annual death toll in the U.S. includes 42 million mourning doves, 30 million squirrels, 28 million quail, 25 million rabbits, 20 million pheasants, 14 million ducks, 6 million deer, and thousands of geese, bears, moose, elk, antelope, swans, cougars, turkeys, wolves, foxes, coyotes, bobcats, boars, and other woodland creatures. (Compiled by The Fund for Animals with data from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and state wildlife agencies.)

Less than seven percent of the U.S. population hunts. Hunting is permitted on 60 percent of U.S. wildlife refuges and in many national forests and state parks. On federal land alone (more than half a billion acres), more than 200 million animals are killed every year.

Hunting by humans operates perversely. The kill ratio at a couple hundred feet with a semi-automatic weapon and scope is virtually 100 percent. The animal, no matter how well-adapted to escape natural predation, has virtually no way to escape death once he/she is in the cross hairs of a scope mounted on a rifle. Nature's adaptive structures and behaviors that have evolved during millions of years simply count for naught when a human is the hunter. Most deer, for example, would not perceive anything that is within the effective range of a big game rifle (up to 400 yards) as a predator or a source of danger. A wolf at that distance, even though detected, would be totally ignored. Even the much smaller range of bow-hunter (about 50-75 feet) is barely of concern to deer. Deer may start to keep an eye on a hunter at that distance, but the evasion instinct doesn't kick in until it's too late.

The stress that hunting inflicts on animals--the noise, the fear, and the constant chase--severely restricts their ability to eat adequately and store the fat and energy they need to survive the winter. Hunting also disrupts migration and hibernation, and the campfires, recreational vehicles, trash, and other hunting side effects endanger both wildlife and the environment. For animals like wolves who mate for life and have close-knit family units, hunting can severely harm entire communities.

Hunters and hunting organizations, including state and federally funded sponsors like Fish and Wildlife Services and departments of environmental conservation, promote supposed justifications as to why hunting is necessary. One of these justifications is that if certain animals were not hunted, they would slowly die of starvation and thus the lesser of the two evils is to humanely kill them. There are problems with this logic.

When hunters talk about shooting overpopulated animals, they are usually referring to white-tailed deer, representing only 3 percent of all the animals killed by hunters. Sport hunters shoot millions of mourning doves, squirrels, rabbits, and waterfowl, and thousands of predators, none of whom any wildlife biologist would claim are overpopulated or need to be hunted. Even with deer, hunters do not search for starving animals. They either shoot animals at random, or they seek out the strongest and healthiest animals in order to bring home the biggest trophies or largest antlers. Hunters and wildlife agencies are not concerned about reducing deer herds, but rather with increasing the number of targets for hunters and the number of potential hunting license dollars. Thus, they use deer overpopulation as a smokescreen to justify their sport. The New Jersey Division of Fish, Game and Wildlife states that "the deer resource has been managed primarily for the purpose of sport hunting," (New Jersey Division of Fish, Game and Wildlife, An Assessment of Deer Hunting in New Jersey, 1990).

Hunters also shoot nonnative species such as ring-necked pheasants who are hand-fed and raised in pens and then released into the wild just before hunting season. Even if the pheasants - native to China - survive the hunters' onslaught, they are certain to die of exposure or starvation in the nonnative environment. While hunters claim they save overpopulated animals from starvation, they intentionally breed some species and let them starve to death.

Hunters and hunting organizations also promote the idea that hunting is necessary for "wildlife management" and "conservation." "Wildlife management" and "conservation" are euphemisms used to describe programs that ensure that there are always enough animals for hunters to hunt. Because they make their money primarily from the sale of hunting licenses, the major function of wildlife agencies is not to protect individual animals or biological diversity, but to propagate "game" species for hunters to shoot.

State agencies build roads through our wild lands to facilitate hunter access, they pour millions of tax dollars into law enforcement of hunting regulations and hunter education, and into manipulating habitat by burning and clear-cutting forests to increase the food supply for "game" species such as deer. More food means a larger herd and more animals available as targets. Hunting programs also cause wildlife overpopulation by stimulating breeding by conducting "buck only" hunts, which can leave as many as six does per buck; pen-raising quail, grouse, and pheasants for use as hunters' targets; transporting raccoons, antelopes, martens, wild turkeys, and other animals from one state to another to bolster populations for hunters; and exterminating predators like wolves and mountain lions in order to throw prey populations off balance, thereby "justifying" the killing of both "dangerous" and "surplus" animals.

Hunters claim that they pay for "conservation" by buying hunting licenses, duck stamps, etc. But the relatively small amount each hunter pays does not cover the cost of hunting programs or game warden salaries. The public lands many hunters use are supported by taxpayers. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service programs, which benefit hunters, get most of their funds from general tax revenues, not hunting fees. Funds benefiting "non-game" species are scarce. Hunters kill more animals than recorded tallies indicate. It is estimated that, for every animal a hunter kills and recovers, at least two wounded but unrecovered animals die slowly and painfully of blood loss, infection, or starvation. Those who don't die often suffer from disabling injuries. Because of carelessness or the effects of alcohol, scores of horses, cows, dogs, cats, hikers, and others are wounded or killed each year by hunters. In 1988, 177 people were killed and 1,719 injured by hunters while walking through the woods or on their own property.

Hunters say that they are "ethical" and follow the concept of "fair chase." What is fair about a chase in which the hunter uses a powerful weapon from ambush and the victim has no defense except luck? Furthermore, despite the hunting community's repeated rhetoric of "hunting ethics," many hunting groups have refused to end repugnant practices that go above and beyond the cruelty inherent in all sport hunting. There is clearly no "fair chase" in many of the activities sanctioned by the hunting community, such as: "canned hunts," in which tame, exotic animals - from African lions to European boars - are unfair game for fee-paying hunters at private fenced-in shooting preserves; "contest kills," in which shooters use live animals as targets while competing for money and prizes in front of a cheering crowd; "wing shooting," in which hunters lure gentle mourning doves to sunflower fields and blast the birds into pieces for nothing more than target practice, leaving more than 20 percent of the birds they shoot crippled and un-retrieved; "baiting," in which trophy hunters litter public lands with piles of rotten food so they can attract unwitting bears or deer and shoot the feeding animals at point-blank range; 'hounding," in which trophy hunters unleash packs of radio-collared dogs to chase and tree bears, cougars, raccoons, foxes, bobcats, lynx, and other animals in a high-tech search and destroy mission, and then follow the radio signal on a handheld receptor and shoot the trapped animal off the tree branch.

Some hunters say hunting with a bow and arrow avoids using high tech equipment that might make it an unfair chase. Bow hunting is one of the cruelest forms of hunting because primitive archery equipment wounds more animals than it kills. Dozens of scientific studies indicate that bow hunting yields more than a 50 percent crippling rate. For every animal dragged from the woods, at least one animal is left wounded to suffer - either to bleed to death or to become infested with parasites and diseases.

Hunting is not the cure but the cause of overpopulation and starvation. Luke Dommer, the founder of the Committee to Abolish Sport Hunting, had proposed to several state wildlife agencies that if they are serious about using hunting as a population control tool in areas where the sex ratio is already badly distorted, they should institute a doe season (taking no bucks but only does until the ratio is again stabilized at 50:50). All agencies have rejected that proposal thereby giving up any pretense of ecologically motivated sound wildlife management. They quite consciously and openly state that they are in business to provide the maximum number of live targets to hunters each year..."


p.s. I've always been self employed, I own real estate now, and my best business involved selling environmentally sound pest controls.

[gapper]

Anyone can make up a "fact" sheet and many do, to support their agenda.
You left the originator of this non factual "fact sheet" off your post..
Yeah, I bet these folks are really objective in making up their "fact" sheet.

In Defense of Animals 3010 Kerner Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901. Tel.: 415-388-9641
www.idausa.org email: ida@idausa.org

[PonderThis]

I gave a link for my post, what more do you want? Now post your rebuttal fact sheets then, not just the fact you scoff at my source. That part's easy to do.

In the meantime, here's another. You might like it's source better. http://www.peta.org/issues/Wildlife/why-...ssary.aspx

Why Sport Hunting Is Cruel and Unnecessary

Excerpt: "Although it was a crucial part of humans’ survival 100,000 years ago, hunting is now nothing more than a violent form of recreation that the vast majority of hunters do not need for subsistence.(1) Hunting has contributed to the extinction of animal species all over the world, including the Tasmanian tiger and the great auk.(2,3)

Less than 5 percent of the U.S. population hunts, yet hunting is permitted in many wildlife refuges, national forests, and state parks and on other public lands.(4) Almost 40 percent of hunters slaughter and maim millions of animals on public land every year, and by some estimates, poachers kill just as many animals illegally.(5,6)

Pain and Suffering

Many animals suffer prolonged, painful deaths when they are injured but not killed by hunters. A member of the Maine Bowhunters Alliance estimates that 50 percent of animals who are shot with crossbows are wounded but not killed.(7) A study of 80 radio-collared white-tailed deer found that of the 22 deer who had been shot with “traditional archery equipment,” 11 were wounded but not recovered by hunters.(8) Twenty percent of foxes who have been wounded by hunters are shot again; 10 percent manage to escape, but “starvation is a likely fate” for them, according to one veterinarian.(9) A South Dakota Department of Game, Fish, and Parks biologist estimates that more than 3 million wounded ducks go “unretrieved” every year.(10) A British study of deer hunting found that 11 percent of deer who’d been killed by hunters died only after being shot two or more times and that some wounded deer suffered for more than 15 minutes before dying.(11)

Hunting disrupts migration and hibernation patterns and destroys families. For animals like wolves, who mate for life and live in close-knit family units, hunting can devastate entire communities. The stress that hunted animals suffer—caused by fear and the inescapable loud noises and other commotion that hunters create—also severely compromises their normal eating habits, making it hard for them to store the fat and energy that they need in order to survive the winter.

Blood-Thirsty and Profit-Driven

To attract more hunters (and their money), federal and state agencies implement programs—often called “wildlife management” or “conservation” programs—that are designed to boost the numbers of “game” species. These programs help to ensure that there are plenty of animals for hunters to kill and, consequently, plenty of revenue from the sale of hunting licenses.

Duck hunters in Louisiana persuaded the state wildlife agency to direct $100,000 a year toward “reduced predator impact,” which involved trapping foxes and raccoons so that more duck eggs would hatch, giving hunters more birds to kill.(12) The Ohio Division of Wildlife teamed up with a hunter-organized society to push for clear-cutting (i.e., decimating large tracts of trees) in Wayne National Forest in order to “produce habitat needed by ruffed grouse.”(13)

In Alaska, the Department of Fish and Game is trying to increase the number of moose for hunters by “controlling” the wolf and bear populations. Grizzlies and black bears have been moved hundreds of miles away from their homes; two were shot by hunters within two weeks of their relocation, and others have simply returned to their homes.(14) Wolves have been slaughtered in order to “let the moose population rebound and provide a higher harvest for local hunters.”(15) In the early 1990s, a program designed to reduce the wolf population backfired when snares failed to kill victims quickly, and photos of suffering wolves were viewed by an outraged public.(16)

Nature Takes Care of Its Own

The delicate balance of ecosystems ensures their own survival—if they are left unaltered. Natural predators help maintain this balance by killing only the sickest and weakest individuals. Hunters, however, kill any animal whose head they would like to hang over the fireplace—including large, healthy animals who are needed to keep the population strong. Elephant poaching is believed to have increased the number of tuskless animals in Africa, and in Canada, hunting has caused bighorn sheep’s horn size to fall by 25 percent in the last 40 years; Nature magazine reports that “the effect on the populations’ genetics is probably deeper.”(17)

Even when unusual natural occurrences cause overpopulation, natural processes work to stabilize the group. Starvation and disease can be tragic, but they are nature’s ways of ensuring that healthy, strong animals survive and maintain the strength level of the rest of their herd or group. Shooting an animal because he or she might starve or become sick is arbitrary and destructive.

Not only does “sport” hunting jeopardize nature’s balance, it also exacerbates other problems. For example, the transfer of captive-bred deer and elk between states for the purpose of hunting is believed to have contributed to the epidemic spread of chronic wasting disease (CWD). As a result, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has given state wildlife agencies millions of dollars to “manage” deer and elk populations.(18) The fatal neurological illness that affects these animals has been likened to mad cow disease, and while the USDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention claim that CWD has no relationship to any similar diseases that affect humans or farmed animals, the slaughter of deer and elk continues.(19,20)

Another problem with hunting involves the introduction of exotic “game” animals who, if they’re able to escape and thrive, pose a threat to native wildlife and established ecosystems.

Canned Cruelty

Most hunting occurs on private land, where laws that protect wildlife are often inapplicable or difficult to enforce. On private lands that are set up as for-profit hunting reserves or game ranches, hunters can pay to kill native and exotic species in “canned hunts.” These animals may be native to the area, raised elsewhere and brought in, or purchased from individuals who are trafficking in unwanted or surplus animals from zoos and circuses. They are hunted and killed for the sole purpose of providing hunters with a “trophy.”

Canned hunts are becoming big business—there are an estimated 1,000 game preserves in the U.S.(21) Ted Turner, the country’s largest private landowner, allows hunters to pay thousands of dollars to kill bison, deer, African antelopes, and turkeys on his 2 million acres.(22)

Animals on canned-hunting ranches are often accustomed to humans and are usually unable to escape from the enclosures that they are confined to, which range in size from just a few yards to thousands of acres. Most of these ranches operate on a “no kill, no pay” policy, so it is in owners’ best interests to ensure that clients get what they came for. Owners do this by offering guides who are familiar with animals’ locations and habits, permitting the use of dogs, and supplying “feeding stations” that lure unsuspecting animals to food while hunters lie in wait.

Many states, including Arizona, Montana, Utah, and Wyoming have limited or banned canned hunts, but there are no federal laws regulating the practice at this time.(23,24)

Other Victims

Hunting accidents destroy property and injure or kill horses, cows, dogs, cats, hikers, and other hunters. In 2006, then-Vice President Dick Cheney famously shot a friend while hunting quail on a canned-hunting preserve.(25) According to the International Hunter Education Association, there are dozens of deaths and hundreds of injuries attributed to hunting in the U.S. every year—and that number only includes incidents involving humans.(26) It is an ongoing problem, and one warden explained that “hunters seem unfamiliar with their firearms and do not have enough respect for the damage they can do.”(27)

The bears, cougars, deer, foxes, and other animals who are chased, trapped, and even killed by dogs during (sometimes illegal) hunts aren’t the only ones to suffer from this variant of the “sport.” Dogs used for hunting are often kept chained or penned and are denied routine veterinary care like vaccines and heartworm medication. Some are lost during hunts and never found while others are turned loose at the end of hunting season to fend for themselves and die of starvation or get struck by a vehicle.

A Humane Alternative

There are 30 million deer in the U.S., and because hunting has been an ineffective method to “control” populations (one Pennsylvania hunter “manages” the population and attracts deer by clearing his 600-acre plot of wooded land and planting corn), some wildlife agencies are considering other management techniques.(28,29) Several recent studies suggest that sterilization is an effective, long-term solution to overpopulation. An experimental birth-control vaccine is being used on female deer in Princeton, N.J.(30,31) One Georgia study of 1,500 white-tailed deer on Cumberland Island concluded that “if females are captured, marked, and counted, sterilization reduces herd size, even at relatively low annual sterilization rates.”(32)

What You Can Do

Before you support a “wildlife” or “conservation” group, ask about its position on hunting. Groups such as the National Wildlife Federation, the National Audubon Society, the Sierra Club, the Izaak Walton League, the Wilderness Society, and the World Wildlife Fund are pro–sport-hunting, or at the very least, they do not oppose it.

To combat hunting in your area, post “no hunting” signs on your land, join or form an anti-hunting organization, protest organized hunts, and spread deer repellent or human hair (from barber shops) near hunting areas. Call 1-800-628-7275 to report poachers in national parks to the National Parks and Conservation Association. Educate others about hunting. Encourage your legislators to enact or enforce wildlife-protection laws, and insist that nonhunters be equally represented on the staffs of wildlife agencies.

References
1) National Research Council, “Science and the Endangered Species Act” (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1995) 21.
2) Grant Holloway, “Cloning to Revive Extinct Species,” CNN.com, 28 May 2002.
3) Canadian Museum of Nature, “Great Auk,” 2008.
4) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, “2006 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation” (Washington, D.C.: GPO, 2007) 4.
5) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 81.
6) Illinois Department of Natural Resources, “How the Program Works,” 10 October 2008.
7) Stephen S. Ditchkoff et al., “Wounding Rates of White-Tailed Deer With Traditional Archery Equipment,” Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (1998).
8) D.J. Renny, “Merits and Demerits of Different Methods of Culling British Wild Mammals: A Veterinary Surgeon’s Perspective,” Proceedings of a Symposium on the Welfare of British Wild Mammals (London: 2002).
9) Spencer Vaa, “Reducing Wounding Losses,” South Dakota Department of Game, Fish, and Parks, 2004.
10) E.L. Bradshaw and P. Bateson, “Welfare Implications of Culling Red Deer (Cervus Elaphus),” Animal Welfare 9 (2000): 3-24.
11) John Swinconeck, “Controlled Hunt May Be Solution to the Excess of ‘Deer at Our Doorstep,’” York County Coast Star 27 Jun. 2002.
12) Bob Marshall, “Is Predator Program Enough?” Times-Picayune 2 Mar. 2003.
13) Dave Golowenski, “Grouse Numbers Go Up if Trees Come Down,” The Columbus Dispatch 20 Feb. 2003.
14) Associated Press, “Hunters Shoot Two Relocated Bears,” 9 Jun. 2003.
15) Joel Gay, “McGrath Wolf Kills Fall Short,” Anchorage Daily News 25 Apr. 2003.
16) Joel Gay, “Governor Takes Heat From Hunters Expecting Aerial Wolf Control,” Anchorage Daily News 8 Apr. 2003.
17) John Whitfield, “Sheep Horns Downsized by Hunters’ Taste for Trophies,” Nature 426 (2003): 595.
18) U.S. Department of Agriculture, “USDA Makes $4 Million Available to State Wildlife Agencies for Strengthening Chronic Wasting Disease Management,” news release, 15 Apr. 2003.
19) U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services, “Chronic Wasting Disease,” 4 Jan. 2007.
20) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of Media Relations, “Fatal Degenerative Neurologic Illnesses in Men Who Participated in Wild Game Feasts—Wisconsin, 2002,” news release, Feb. 2003.
21) Sam Farr, “Reps. Farr, Shays Introduce Bill to Can Canned Hunts,” U.S. Fed News 7 Oct. 2004.
22) Robert M. Poole, “Hunters: For Love of the Land,” National Geographic Magazine Nov. 2007.
23) National Conference of State Legislatures, “Environment, Energy, and Transportation Program: Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife,” Apr. 2008.
24) Clint Talbott, “Hunting in a Cage, There Ought to Be a Law,” Boulder Daily Camera 25 Jan. 2008.
25) Dana Bash, “Cheney Accidentally Shoots Fellow Hunter,” CNN.com, 12 Feb. 2006.
26International Hunter Education Association, “Hunter Incident Clearinghouse,” 30 Mar. 2008.
27) Tom Harelson, “1998 Deer Gun Season Report,” Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 8 Dec. 1998.
28) Associated Press, “Deer Eating Away at Forests, Nationwide,” 18 Jan. 2005.
29) Andrew C. Revkin, “States Seek to Restore Deer Balance,” The New York Times 29 Dec. 2002.
30) Roger Segelken, “Surgical Sterilization Snips Away at Deer Population,” Cornell News 19 Mar. 2003.
31) Associated Press, “Princeton’s Deer Hunt Coming to a Premature End,,” 21 Mar. 2003.
32) James L. Boone and Richard G. Wiegert, “Modeling Deer Herd Management: Sterilization Is a Viable Option,” Ecological Modeling 72 (1994): 175-86."

[gapper]

Here's a start, Ponder.
Get back to me when you're ready to dispute these with facts, rather than PETA propaganda.

http://www.fws.gov/hunting/
http://www.nssfblog.com/hunting-is-a-wil...ment-tool/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunting
http://fwp.mt.gov/fishAndWildlife/manage...iples.html
http://dnr.maryland.gov/wildlife/Hunt_Tr...astool.asp
http://www.nature.nps.gov/biology/wildli...ldlife.cfm
http://www.dfw.state.or.us/resources/hun...mework.pdf
http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewco...m_usdanwrc