From: swood@vela.acs.oakland.edu (Scott Wood - EVENSONG)
Subject: Re: Fund for Animals' true agenda revealed?
Organization: Oakland University, Rochester MI.
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 03:45:56 GMT

unglenie@ford.ecn.purdue.edu (Robert J Unglenieks) writes:

`Scott Wood writes:

`>Because they do it under the guise of animal welfare.

`If preventing the needless slaughter of animals isn't animal welfare,
`what is?

But how?  The only efforts (short of sit-ins and demonstrations which
never work anyway - haven't since the sixties) I have seen are just as
if not more harmful than the things they were trying to stop.
(ie liberating animals to starvation and little or no care)

`>When in fact some types of hunting are necessary to control populations of
`>animals.  


`Why is hunting the only option?

What other options are there?  If a population gets out of control, or
gets too large, it must be reduced.  You could try to feed them but
that would only increase the problem and increase the accompanying problems
such as lack of habitat and disease.
You could hire professionals to slaughter them as the settlers did with
the Buffalo but I think we all know how that turned out.
You could poison them with aerial disbursment of chemicals like the
med fly or the Gipsy moth, but that usually doesn't go over to well either.
Or you could remove all speed limits and put reinforced bumpers on cars
and let them do the trick - they already lay claim to 200,000+ roadside
deer last year alone (and that does not count the ones that walked off
and died in the swamp which is probably two thirds of hit deer)

So instead they leave it up to hunters.  People who for the most part,
spend lots of time, energy and money to see to it that the animals are
around for a long time to come.  People who for the most part devote
great deals of time and expense to make sure that the subject of their
hunting, the animal, has as quick and humane an end as possible.
People who's license dollars and club dues and hands-on efforts attribute
to more feeding, land and habitat management, and actual good for wild
animals (not just game animals) than any other group - AR or otherwise -
anywhere.

` What are the different "types of hunting" ?

The different types are obviously based upon the animals hunted.  Some
population (such as ruffed grouse - a.k.a. partridge) do not seem to
be effected by hunting activity.  They have a cyclical pattern to their
population level that does not seem to be effect positively or negatively
by high or low hunting harvests as well as game management.

`If management policies were aimed at expanding available habitat, promoting
`decreased breeding of the species instead of providing resources for hunters,
`some of the problems could be SOLVED rather than put off for a few years....

Who do you think pays for state land?  I know for a fact that without
the revenues from hunting in my state, there would be probably one
tenth of the state recreation areas in this state.

And how in the hell do you intend to decrease breeding of wild animals?
That is preposterous.  I suppose you are going to spay and nueter them too?

I heard a quote the other day from a book that claims the quote was
outlandish and untrue.  I was from Ronald Reagan back around 1984 in which
he claimed there is more forest in this country today than when Columbus
landed on American soil.  I have not found proof to substatiate this
yet, but I believe it to be true.  Most people wouldn't as they are
thinking in regards to "mature forest" in contrast to forests in general.

I bring this up because I want to make the point that the deer population
in the country is phenominally higher than it was when the Indians were
the only people here.  This is for a variety of reasons, the two most
profound of which being the conversion of Mature forests to new growth
forests (which provide more abundant food in the form of buds on young,
fast growing trees such as popple and sage) and the increase in predatory
control - a.k.a. human hunting.  This has been proven.

If it weren't for hunters, there would be no reintroduction of Elk to
my state.  There would be no reintroduction of Grey wolf to my state.
There would be no reintroduction of Grayling to my state.  There would
be no reintroduction of Moose to my state.  And there would be no
introduction o Ring-neck or Sechuan Pheasant to my state.  And don't go
blaming them for the sole reason they need to be re-introduced either
because I have data that points to both hunting and human intervention
in the environment that points to their decline in numbers.

I can go on and on about programs that have helped with animal disease
and habitat and population study and river structure management etc. etc.
that I am aware of and whenever possible been active in in my state that
were all funded by Hunters and Fishermen.  If I take, I pay back.  If
I give, I would like something in return.  So why not use the efforts
to provide legitimate hunters and fishermen with more opportunity?

`>I think of an example of a club which I belong to that openly welcomes
`>Elk hunters

`Question:  Does the club encourage/discourage killing of the females?

What difference does it make?  In fact, the club levies an additional
fee and provides a guide (more of a monitor) to help them with the hunt.
There is a charge to hunt for members in addition to the state charge,
and a much higher charge for non-members.  The state decides who gets
to kill male or female.
However, in the case of deer, the club initially did not allow anterless
permits to be used, and now just levies a fee for any deer taken on premisis
with one of the permits.

`Well, at least the animals appear to be smart.  Isn't the overabundance of
`elk an indication of a problem with the local ecosystem?

Not, and No.  The elk are actually quite less intelligent than deer.
They, for the most part, do not fear man and will ignorantly stand still
while cars drive up on them and even when being shot at.  I have seen
some study results that show elk to be much less intelligent than deer
and moose both.

And no, ther is no problem with the ecology of the environment other than
the Elk themselves.  The club of which I speak regularly feeds deer and
turkey population as well as promotes tree cutting for both profit and
for new young growth (deer food).  The elk love the food just as much
as the deer and eat more of it per capita.  They also have had to result
to special feeding structures for the deer as the elk will clean them
right out.

I have witnessed elk and elk damage first hand.  Until you have spent as
much time in the woods with them as I have, I would not question their
interaction with their environments ecology.

The most profound example of the damage an elk population can do I
witnessed while horseback riding down state.  I was at a friends house,
and she took me out riding, and we came over a hill, and I suddenly got
a very cold feeling that sent chills down my spine.  I soon realized this
was because the line of trees in front of us had a very gloomy look to
them.
I soon came to discover that this area was part of a five acre spread
used to hold a small number of elk. (4-5 that were under observation
for some blood disease, which I believe is now a real problem with
elk populations out west)  There was a large feeder at the front of
the field that was packed full of food that should very well have been
to the liking and much to the nourishment of the elk.
However, at closer inspection of the trees, they had all (every one in
a rather large dense section of woods on the back portion of the plot)
been stripped clean of the outer layer of bark and wood and every
little branch as high as the elk could reach so that it formed a dark
line at about head level accross the woods.
Later talking to the manager of the reserve, I discovered that these
animals were solely responsible for the damage, and had been there less
than a month-and-a-half.

swood
-- 
+========================+    -------_________     +=========================+
| WANTED - DEAD OR ALIVE |    o\ o \     ____|o    |  If you see this lure,  |
|  Creek Chub "Plunker"  |      \___\_-o-    viv   | PLEASE send me email!!! |
+========================+            viv          +=========================+