WWPD?
June 24th 2009 21:36
I got a good one for you. This kinda even shocks me, but it is worth it to tick of animal lovers and their solutions to major animal problems. Now being an animal lover is fine, but don't try to find solutions to a problem you really have no idea or control over.
Many people have a problem hunting. I went hunting only once and it was a wasted cold day without so much as a bird sighting. I don't like hunting, but I am not going to take the hunting rights away from people. A bullet can cut your food bill by a lot if you consume a bit of meat throughout the year.
A town has a deer problem so bad that there is an increase in car-deer accidents. I seen a few with casualties up my way and really appreciate hunting. Not to mention that deer tend to consume vegetable gardens, and that is heartbreaking to vegetarians that can't seek retaliation!
They have no natural enemies. They also carry the lyme disease tick, and can be dangerous near human habitation.
Placer County has a deer problem in residential areas. It must be so bad that they are considering allowing children 12-17 to hunt deer in residential areas. Of course they will only use bows and shotguns.
I disagree with the under 15 year crowds. But I am not their parents and hopefully they'll be supervised.
Then we have the animal lovers. From the article:
But many say people who live in deer country should learn to be aware of the animals.
(That's right, make sure the residents should be accountable and even more alert! Of course I'll bet these people don't live in 'deer country!')
Other alternatives include traffic controls or putting up more deer crossing signs at a cost of a few hundred dollars a piece. The hunt is thought to be more cost effective because people have to pay to take part.
(Traffic controls? Like what? A RR crossing-type alert with lights and a crossbar that stops traffic for hours? Putting up more deer signs? If you live there, you know they're there! The price you pay for a license and a bullet, or arrow, are much more cost efficient!)
Many people have a problem hunting. I went hunting only once and it was a wasted cold day without so much as a bird sighting. I don't like hunting, but I am not going to take the hunting rights away from people. A bullet can cut your food bill by a lot if you consume a bit of meat throughout the year.
A town has a deer problem so bad that there is an increase in car-deer accidents. I seen a few with casualties up my way and really appreciate hunting. Not to mention that deer tend to consume vegetable gardens, and that is heartbreaking to vegetarians that can't seek retaliation!
They have no natural enemies. They also carry the lyme disease tick, and can be dangerous near human habitation.
Placer County has a deer problem in residential areas. It must be so bad that they are considering allowing children 12-17 to hunt deer in residential areas. Of course they will only use bows and shotguns.
I disagree with the under 15 year crowds. But I am not their parents and hopefully they'll be supervised.
Then we have the animal lovers. From the article:
But many say people who live in deer country should learn to be aware of the animals.
(That's right, make sure the residents should be accountable and even more alert! Of course I'll bet these people don't live in 'deer country!')
Other alternatives include traffic controls or putting up more deer crossing signs at a cost of a few hundred dollars a piece. The hunt is thought to be more cost effective because people have to pay to take part.
(Traffic controls? Like what? A RR crossing-type alert with lights and a crossbar that stops traffic for hours? Putting up more deer signs? If you live there, you know they're there! The price you pay for a license and a bullet, or arrow, are much more cost efficient!)
| 16 |
| Vote |
Subscribe to this blog
