Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

Just in case you missed this part of the article. So which natural predator of the deer would you like to see reintroduced into the suburbs?

Rednecks

Ain't been to Utah, have you?

Lol, far more mormon crazies than there are rednecks... or at least, not Tennessee/Kentucky rednecks

A bunch of redknecks I lived by here tried to talk me into joining a local militia, but that's a thread for another day.

Relapse wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
Words fail me...

I know families who are going hungry this winter because of restrictions put on deer hunting, and money is being thrown at crap like this?

Maybe you shouldn't be complaining about "restrictions put on deer hunting" and instead look into why the families are going hungry.

What's better, giving money to people welfare money, or letting them hunt if they want to. No one is talking about making them hunt, but letting them seems a good thing to me. It lets them live better, and dose an important job. My brother used to shoot rabbits for the same reason. Now he dose it because he enjoys getting his own food.

Doing one does not necessitate removing the other.

Hunting supplementing welfare is a very viable option, especially if you start up a program allowing for the hunters on welfare to get paid as part of the process of "pest control".

Very true, especially when lives are being saved from car wrecks caused by deer as well as money saved on paying people to cull the population. Red letter day here, we agree on something!

Only thing we might not agree on is how much supervision should be necessary.

I for one am sick and tired of hunters in my area.
Too often I go out and find carcasses with antlers/heads removed but the rest just dumped. And sometimes you'll find those out of season as well.
I've also found carcasses left in a creek behind my land, and that's just not cool.

Relapse wrote:
A co worker has a brother who is on welfare in Kentucky or Tennessee, I can't remember which, but the state gives him and others like him that know how to hunt about 12 deer tags a year and lets them begin hunting before deer season.

This is a really good idea, a win-win for everyone involved.

Do they also waive fees on fishing licences, do you know?

 Ouze wrote:

Relapse wrote:
A co worker has a brother who is on welfare in Kentucky or Tennessee, I can't remember which, but the state gives him and others like him that know how to hunt about 12 deer tags a year and lets them begin hunting before deer season.

This is a really good idea, a win-win for everyone involved.

Do they also waive fees on fishing licences, do you know?

Doubtful, but a $15 fishing license isn't that big a deal when you consider it could save you hundreds in food costs.

 Ouze wrote:

Relapse wrote:
A co worker has a brother who is on welfare in Kentucky or Tennessee, I can't remember which, but the state gives him and others like him that know how to hunt about 12 deer tags a year and lets them begin hunting before deer season.

This is a really good idea, a win-win for everyone involved.

Do they also waive fees on fishing licences, do you know?

IMO they need to be getting those welfare folks in the area out hunting boar... them things are a fething menace.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

Relapse wrote:
A co worker has a brother who is on welfare in Kentucky or Tennessee, I can't remember which, but the state gives him and others like him that know how to hunt about 12 deer tags a year and lets them begin hunting before deer season.

This is a really good idea, a win-win for everyone involved.

Do they also waive fees on fishing licences, do you know?

IMO they need to be getting those welfare folks in the area out hunting boar... them things are a fething menace.

Most of that meat is just inedible. Unless we're paying them per head, it's not doing them a lot of good.

One problem that can show up with "hunting to supplement food" is the cost of processing the deer. It's something that can be subsidized by the state, but it's something to think about. Maybe give out vouchers for processing together with deer tags.

My grandfather was stubborn and refused to pay someone else to butcher his deer. So he and Dad butchered them on the porch.

Helluva mess. Grandma always freaked out. Then again, he and Dad *would* track blood into the house, and that seems like reasonable "woman of the house freaking out" territory.

 d-usa wrote:
One problem that can show up with "hunting to supplement food" is the cost of processing the deer. It's something that can be subsidized by the state, but it's something to think about. Maybe give out vouchers for processing together with deer tags.

Processing deer isn't really all that hard to do yourself, and it's a safe bet that most who'd "welfare" hunt would process it themselves.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
Words fail me...

I know families who are going hungry this winter because of restrictions put on deer hunting, and money is being thrown at crap like this?

Maybe you shouldn't be complaining about "restrictions put on deer hunting" and instead look into why the families are going hungry.

What's better, giving money to people welfare money, or letting them hunt if they want to. No one is talking about making them hunt, but letting them seems a good thing to me. It lets them live better, and dose an important job. My brother used to shoot rabbits for the same reason. Now he dose it because he enjoys getting his own food.

Doing one does not necessitate removing the other.

Hunting supplementing welfare is a very viable option, especially if you start up a program allowing for the hunters on welfare to get paid as part of the process of "pest control".

Very true, especially when lives are being saved from car wrecks caused by deer as well as money saved on paying people to cull the population. Red letter day here, we agree on something!

Only thing we might not agree on is how much supervision should be necessary.

I for one am sick and tired of hunters in my area.
Too often I go out and find carcasses with antlers/heads removed but the rest just dumped. And sometimes you'll find those out of season as well.
I've also found carcasses left in a creek behind my land, and that's just not cool.

Hunters like that should have their rifles auctioned off for resource management and be banned from hunting for a set amount of time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ouze wrote:

Relapse wrote:
A co worker has a brother who is on welfare in Kentucky or Tennessee, I can't remember which, but the state gives him and others like him that know how to hunt about 12 deer tags a year and lets them begin hunting before deer season.

This is a really good idea, a win-win for everyone involved.

Do they also waive fees on fishing licences, do you know?

I don't know that, but if the fish populations are healthy, I don't see why that wouldn't be a good idea.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 d-usa wrote:
One problem that can show up with "hunting to supplement food" is the cost of processing the deer. It's something that can be subsidized by the state, but it's something to think about. Maybe give out vouchers for processing together with deer tags.

As far as I know, the state takes care of the processing fees, but only allows the meat to be done up in certain ways. No deer jerky, for instance.

 djones520 wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
One problem that can show up with "hunting to supplement food" is the cost of processing the deer. It's something that can be subsidized by the state, but it's something to think about. Maybe give out vouchers for processing together with deer tags.

Processing deer isn't really all that hard to do yourself, and it's a safe bet that most who'd "welfare" hunt would process it themselves.

I know that I've been interested in hunting, but I've never done it so far. So I wouldn't know that much about processing or wouldn't have all the tools needed for it (no way to make ground meat for example). For somebody like me that would be a road block and processing would be helpful.

@Relapse: I can see the "no deer jerky" rule and other rules for "snack" type processing options similar to some WIC restrictions.

 d-usa wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
One problem that can show up with "hunting to supplement food" is the cost of processing the deer. It's something that can be subsidized by the state, but it's something to think about. Maybe give out vouchers for processing together with deer tags.

Processing deer isn't really all that hard to do yourself, and it's a safe bet that most who'd "welfare" hunt would process it themselves.

I know that I've been interested in hunting, but I've never done it so far. So I wouldn't know that much about processing or wouldn't have all the tools needed for it (no way to make ground meat for example). For somebody like me that would be a road block and processing would be helpful.

@Relapse: I can see the "no deer jerky" rule and other rules for "snack" type processing options similar to some WIC restrictions.

Sure, or you could get some friends to help you out.

Let me know, maybe I'll come on over to Okie land one day.

I would be more sympathetic if rogue hunters were not such a massive problem were I live

Look. Can't we all just agree that Bambi is fething tasty and we should kill more deer?

 Alexzandvar wrote:
I would be more sympathetic if rogue hunters were not such a massive problem were I live

Where I live people just don't respect the limit to how close you can hunt to a house.

Thanks Obama!

 d-usa wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
One problem that can show up with "hunting to supplement food" is the cost of processing the deer. It's something that can be subsidized by the state, but it's something to think about. Maybe give out vouchers for processing together with deer tags.

Processing deer isn't really all that hard to do yourself, and it's a safe bet that most who'd "welfare" hunt would process it themselves.

I know that I've been interested in hunting, but I've never done it so far. So I wouldn't know that much about processing or wouldn't have all the tools needed for it (no way to make ground meat for example). For somebody like me that would be a road block and processing would be helpful.

@Relapse: I can see the "no deer jerky" rule and other rules for "snack" type processing options similar to some WIC restrictions.

Now I'm really confused...

Why couldn't you "jerky" them? Isn't that a good way to stretch out the meat?

Curbing deer populations would only work via sterilizing if they sterilize the breeding does - at which point you're removing the healthy breeders from the herd.

This is the same problem that hunting can suffer from since humans hunting don't go for the sick/weak/young/stragglers but instead for the prime deer in the herd. As a result hunting can strip out the best in a herd - as well as key adults that know migratory routes - cut them out and deer or other migratory herd animals can end up lost (big problem in many African countries with elephants).

Hunting can at least be controlled to focus on the weaker elements in the herd and to ignore the prime herd members - sterilizing can't ignore the prime because they are typically going to be the most likely breed successfully.


On that ground, to my mind at least, hunting might be the suitable alternative - at least so long as its not trophy hunting.

That said I've started reading (and not finished) an interesting book on animal populations and their ability to self regulate their own population even without the influence of predatory activity. It might be that there are other ways to curb population expansion without culling or sterilizing the herds.

Heck we can already know how to curb many pest species in urban areas by greater efficiency in waste food removal, storage and in general volumes of waste food.

There also strong argument I've read with regard to vegetation diversity. The argument being that many reserves or plantations in the countryside are maintained along the lines of mono-crops or are arranged as such to limit the number and diversity of present species (to say nothing of the reduction in small woodland and other areas as a result of increased farm sizes and field sizes - as well as unification of fields into larger single fields).
The example was bee populations, showing that an urban bee could potentially have access to a greater variety of flowering plants than those in many rural areas.

As such it might be that increased rural natural diversity would reduce the attractiveness of urban areas and reduce migration of herds into urban areas.

We have had several pet deaths in the area thanks to overzealous and unregulated hunting.

Its really sad and annoying. Freaked my little brother out after our dog almost got shot.

 Alexzandvar wrote:
We have had several pet deaths in the area thanks to overzealous and unregulated hunting.

Its really sad and annoying. Freaked my little brother out after our dog almost got shot.

Yeesh, that's bad.

I couldnt read the link right. So I thought it said "Removing Deer with shrapnel" Im thinking "Holy gak, they are killing deer with land mines? Why is dakka upset? That is awesome


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 kronk wrote:
Look. Can't we all just agree that Bambi is fething tasty and we should kill more deer?

I have had Venison......ehh take it or leave it. Now horse meat on the other hand.

Pony meat is best horse meat.

Edit: That was not an MLP jab...

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Alexzandvar wrote:
We have had several pet deaths in the area thanks to overzealous and unregulated hunting.

Its really sad and annoying. Freaked my little brother out after our dog almost got shot.

Yeesh, that's bad.

I know I will get pounced on for this but It would be nice to at least restrict the use of automatic weapons for hunting, the area around my farm sometimes sounds like fething normandy landings.

Hunters also love to try and get around private property laws by saying they were "threatened" by a wild animal and "had" to flee into your farmland.

I have not had that, but people in cali are hesitant to kill anything the size of a small child

 Alexzandvar wrote:
We have had several pet deaths in the area thanks to overzealous and unregulated hunting.

Its really sad and annoying. Freaked my little brother out after our dog almost got shot.

Dude I can understand that (see the avatar for a hint).

 Alexzandvar wrote:
I know I will get pounced on for this but It would be nice to at least restrict the use of automatic weapons for hunting, the area around my farm sometimes sounds like fething normandy landings.

Hunters also love to try and get around private property laws by saying they were "threatened" by a wild animal and "had" to flee into your farmland.

Forgive my ignorance, but how common is it for an automatic weapon to be used when hunting?

 Frazzled wrote:

 Alexzandvar wrote:
We have had several pet deaths in the area thanks to overzealous and unregulated hunting.

Its really sad and annoying. Freaked my little brother out after our dog almost got shot.

Dude I can understand that (see the avatar for a hint).

Yeah my family really adores it's pets, so we have tried to clamp down on hunters in the area but the local government despises us for our political alignment


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Alexzandvar wrote:
I know I will get pounced on for this but It would be nice to at least restrict the use of automatic weapons for hunting, the area around my farm sometimes sounds like fething normandy landings.

Hunters also love to try and get around private property laws by saying they were "threatened" by a wild animal and "had" to flee into your farmland.

Forgive my ignorance, but how common is it for an automatic weapon to be used when hunting?

Not common in other areas, as my uncle is a game warden in colorado and I myself have been hunting before.

In my home area though there's a big overlap of gun "collectors" and "hunters" we find a lot of corpses that were obviously sprayed with bullets in a fashion you would only think an Ork on the waaaghh path would be capable of.

 Alexzandvar wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Alexzandvar wrote:
We have had several pet deaths in the area thanks to overzealous and unregulated hunting.

Its really sad and annoying. Freaked my little brother out after our dog almost got shot.

Yeesh, that's bad.

I know I will get pounced on for this but It would be nice to at least restrict the use of automatic weapons for hunting, the area around my farm sometimes sounds like fething normandy landings.

Hunters also love to try and get around private property laws by saying they were "threatened" by a wild animal and "had" to flee into your farmland.

If people are using machine guns in your neighbrohood you need to rethink your life choices and vacate the neighborhood..NOW.

 Alexzandvar wrote:
Not common in other areas, as my uncle is a game warden in colorado and I myself have been hunting before.

In my home area though there's a big overlap of gun "collectors" and "hunters" we find a lot of corpses that were obviously sprayed with bullets in a fashion you would only think an Ork on the waaaghh path would be capable of.

So is it an issue that needs regulation if it is such a small number? Are licenses issued that state automatic weapons may not be used?

You know an "automatic weapon" is a machine gun right? I've never heard of hunting with a machine gun.