The Suburban Deer Uprising
BY Herschel Smith7 years, 11 months ago
Consider the events of the the past week. A Maryland teenager shot and killed an adult deer after it broke down the door of his house. In South Carolina, a deer smashed through the window of a Gold’s Gym and raced through the weight room as terrified humans scattered. In New York City, the beloved Harlem deer that somehow made its way into the heart of America’s largest city died after police tranquilized and captured it.
These aren’t just zany wild animal anecdotes. This is what happens when state and local governments don’t let people shoot deer. The fact is, deer populations across the country are about a hundred times what they were a century ago. The only thing that will stop the deer uprising is if Americans are allowed to kill more of them.
In his 2012 book, “Nature Wars: The Incredible Story of How Wildlife Comebacks Turned Backyards into Battlegrounds,” Jim Sterba chronicled a dramatic swing in the fortunes of our continent’s wild animals overt the past century. By 1900, centuries of more or less unregulated hunting and trapping had reduced wild animals populations in America to mere remnants. The conservation movement, writes Sterba, began as a response to this dire situation, and was spearheaded by public figures like then-New York governor Teddy Roosevelt. Public lands were set aside for wildlife refuges and parks, limits were set on hunting, and efforts launched nationwide to restock wildlife. It took time, but the conservationists were successful.
Too successful, it turns out. Wildlife damage to crops and infrastructure now exceeds $28 billion a year, with $1.5 billion from deer crashes alone. Chicago now has thousands of coyotes. Texas has about 3 million feral hogs (and counting), which cause an estimated half-billion dollars in damages every year.
Yes, and the cost of feral hogs in Georgia is even worse, having put entire farms out of business. Here’s the problem.
First of all, when states began modern game management techniques, it made some sense. This has caused herds populations to rebound to enormous sizes compared to even what they were in the days before humans and animals fought over the same land. But as the herd size increased, the inevitable occurred.
States began to see the herds as their own property, charging for tags, huge sums of money in certain cases, and they began to put limits on the kinds of firearms that could be used, limit the hunting season, and control even what time of day or night you could hunt. Some of this makes some sense even if it involves self policing rather than the nanny state assuming the power to themselves (i.e., caliber size to ensure an ethical kill), but the states controls are implemented for the wrong reason.
Only the king’s men may hunt in the king’s forests, they think. The second problem is that control freaks have passed laws just about everywhere concerning if and when you can discharge a firearm. I’ve had Coyotes coming down the road towards me, and I had to use other means besides a firearm to chase them away because, you guessed it, it’s illegal for me to discharge a firearm where I live. Only the police can do that. Apparently, only the police need to engage in self defense, according to the state.
Yes, we’re going to have to hunt the herds back down, but we’re going to have to be allowed to discharge firearms when we need to. And by the way, limits on feral hogs, whether bag limit or when or how they can be shot, make no sense at all. If your state has such a limit, then the state rulers hate you and love the money it brings in to license you to hunt and tell you how and when to do it. They hate you because hogs are destructive to the environment and can harm you and your children, and they love money because they have no scruples.
On December 25, 2016 at 8:50 am, Pat Hines said:
Feral hog hunting in South Carolina. There are wild hogs in my immediate area of operation, but I’ve not seen them or their sign.
http://www.dnr.sc.gov/regs/wildhogregs.html
On December 25, 2016 at 8:57 am, LibertyFirst said:
“”I’ve had Coyotes coming down the road towards me, and I had to use other means besides a firearm to chase them away because, you guessed it, it’s illegal for me to discharge a firearm where I live. Only the police can do that.”” Interesting considering the recent ruling that cops can slaughter family members (dogs) because they are ‘frightened’. Perhaps a direct question to the head of the local blue light gangs is in order to find out if they would truly charge someone defending their life or the lives of their loved ones is in order. If the result is not in alignment with personal liberty, perhaps a reasonable member of the local media (if they exist there) would be willing to do a piece on the paradox….
On December 25, 2016 at 11:09 pm, Daniel Barger said:
You are correct…..wildlife populations have swung from one extreme to the other. They were plentiful….then mankind, with firearms decimated them in the 19th century due to lack of control….
both governmental and self control. The state stepped in and in a predictable manner has swung the pendulum back again to where wildlife is now plentiful in many places. Humanity for some bizarre reason simply can not find and maintain balance. Society’s always swing from one extreme to the other in terms of virtually everything. This is just one more example of that….and further proof that we are a clever species….but not an intelligent one. If we removed the restrictions that have brought about this surplus of deer and other animals in very short order these species would become endangered if not extinct. Because humans have ZERO self control.
On December 27, 2016 at 12:35 pm, Archer said:
In the Pacific Northwest, hunter-hating uber-environmentalists used the exploding deer and elk population to press for re-introducing wolves as population control.
Now the local hunters are competing against both wolves AND the environmentalists in government when it comes to wildlife. Wolf populations are stable, and deer/elk populations are still growing (albeit more slowly), but because the wolf re-introduction was so “successful”, the environmentalists are pushing to raise the already-arbitrarily-determined number of breeding wolf pairs rather than loosening hunting restrictions.
IOW, they seem to want to reduce hunting by humans, whatever the cost. If the deer become too numerous, they’ll push for more dangerous wildlife rather than allowing hunting. If they push too far (remember, the “required” number of breeding wolf pairs is arbitrary, with no basis in ecological reality), the deer will be killed off by predation. What then will the wolves eat?
The answer, of course, is domestic animals, and if they’re hungry enough, humans. It’s impossible to find a working balance when government environmentalists won’t take their thumbs off the scale. [sarcasm] But hey, we got wolves re-introduced successfully! [/sarcasm]