Washington Hunter
Well-known member
For Environmental Balance, Pick Up a Rifle
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF (NYT)
Published: December 4, 2005
Here's a quick quiz: Which large American mammal kills the most humans each year?
It's not the bear, which kills about two people a year in North America. Nor is it the wolf, which in modern times hasn't killed anyone in this country. It's not the cougar, which kills one person every year or two.
Rather, it's the deer. Unchecked by predators, deer populations are exploding in a way that is profoundly unnatural and that is destroying the ecosystem in many parts of the country. In a wilderness, there might be 10 deer per square mile; in parts of New Jersey, there are up to 200 per square mile.
One result is ticks and Lyme disease, but deer also kill people more directly. A study for the insurance industry estimated that deer kill about 150 people a year in car crashes nationwide and cause $1 billion in damage. Granted, deer aren't stalking us, and they come out worse in these collisions -- but it's still true that in a typical year, an American is less likely to be killed by Osama bin Laden than by Bambi.
If the symbol of the environment's being out of whack in the 1960's was the Cuyahoga River in Cleveland catching fire, one such symbol today is deer congregating around what they think of as salad bars and what we think of as suburbs.
So what do we do? Let's bring back hunting.
Now, you've probably just spilled your coffee. These days, among the university-educated crowd in the cities, hunting is viewed as barbaric.
The upshot is that towns in New York and New Jersey are talking about using birth control to keep deer populations down. (Liberals presumably support free condoms, while conservatives back abstinence education.) Deer contraception hasn't been very successful, though.
Meanwhile, the same population bomb has spread to bears. A bear hunt has been scheduled for this week in New Jersey -- prompting outrage from some animal rights groups (there's also talk of bear contraception: make love, not cubs).
As for deer, partly because hunting is perceived as brutal and vaguely psychopathic, towns are taking out contracts on deer through discreet private companies. Greenwich, Conn., budgeted $47,000 this year to pay a company to shoot 80 deer from raised platforms over four nights -- as well as $8,000 for deer birth control.
Look, this is ridiculous.
We have an environmental imbalance caused in part by the decline of hunting. Humans first wiped out certain predators -- like wolves and cougars -- but then expanded their own role as predators to sustain a rough ecological balance. These days, though, hunters are on the decline.
According to ''Families Afield: An Initiative for the Future of Hunting,'' a report by an alliance of shooting organizations, for every 100 hunters who die or stop hunting, only 69 hunters take their place.
I was raised on ''Bambi'' -- but also, as an Oregon farm boy, on venison and elk meat. But deer are not pets, and dead deer are as natural as live deer. To wring one's hands over them, perhaps after polishing off a hamburger, is soggy sentimentality.
What's the alternative to hunting? Is it preferable that deer die of disease and hunger? Or, as the editor of Adirondack Explorer magazine suggested, do we introduce wolves into the burbs?
To their credit, many environmentalists agree that hunting can be green. The New Jersey Audubon Society this year advocated deer hunting as an ecological necessity.
There's another reason to encourage hunting: it connects people with the outdoors and creates a broader constituency for wilderness preservation. At a time when America's wilderness is being gobbled away for logging, mining or oil drilling, that's a huge boon.
Granted, hunting isn't advisable in suburban backyards, and I don't expect many soccer moms to install gun racks in their minivans. But it's an abdication of environmental responsibility to eliminate other predators and then refuse to assume the job ourselves. In that case, the collisions with humans will simply get worse.
In October, for example, Wayne Goldsberry was sitting in a home in northwestern Arkansas when he heard glass breaking in the next room. It was a home invasion -- by a buck.
Mr. Goldsberry, who is six feet one inch and weighs 200 pounds, wrestled with the intruder for 40 minutes. Blood spattered the walls before he managed to break the buck's neck.
So it's time to reestablish a balance in the natural world -- by accepting the idea that hunting is as natural as bird-watching.
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF (NYT)
Published: December 4, 2005
Here's a quick quiz: Which large American mammal kills the most humans each year?
It's not the bear, which kills about two people a year in North America. Nor is it the wolf, which in modern times hasn't killed anyone in this country. It's not the cougar, which kills one person every year or two.
Rather, it's the deer. Unchecked by predators, deer populations are exploding in a way that is profoundly unnatural and that is destroying the ecosystem in many parts of the country. In a wilderness, there might be 10 deer per square mile; in parts of New Jersey, there are up to 200 per square mile.
One result is ticks and Lyme disease, but deer also kill people more directly. A study for the insurance industry estimated that deer kill about 150 people a year in car crashes nationwide and cause $1 billion in damage. Granted, deer aren't stalking us, and they come out worse in these collisions -- but it's still true that in a typical year, an American is less likely to be killed by Osama bin Laden than by Bambi.
If the symbol of the environment's being out of whack in the 1960's was the Cuyahoga River in Cleveland catching fire, one such symbol today is deer congregating around what they think of as salad bars and what we think of as suburbs.
So what do we do? Let's bring back hunting.
Now, you've probably just spilled your coffee. These days, among the university-educated crowd in the cities, hunting is viewed as barbaric.
The upshot is that towns in New York and New Jersey are talking about using birth control to keep deer populations down. (Liberals presumably support free condoms, while conservatives back abstinence education.) Deer contraception hasn't been very successful, though.
Meanwhile, the same population bomb has spread to bears. A bear hunt has been scheduled for this week in New Jersey -- prompting outrage from some animal rights groups (there's also talk of bear contraception: make love, not cubs).
As for deer, partly because hunting is perceived as brutal and vaguely psychopathic, towns are taking out contracts on deer through discreet private companies. Greenwich, Conn., budgeted $47,000 this year to pay a company to shoot 80 deer from raised platforms over four nights -- as well as $8,000 for deer birth control.
Look, this is ridiculous.
We have an environmental imbalance caused in part by the decline of hunting. Humans first wiped out certain predators -- like wolves and cougars -- but then expanded their own role as predators to sustain a rough ecological balance. These days, though, hunters are on the decline.
According to ''Families Afield: An Initiative for the Future of Hunting,'' a report by an alliance of shooting organizations, for every 100 hunters who die or stop hunting, only 69 hunters take their place.
I was raised on ''Bambi'' -- but also, as an Oregon farm boy, on venison and elk meat. But deer are not pets, and dead deer are as natural as live deer. To wring one's hands over them, perhaps after polishing off a hamburger, is soggy sentimentality.
What's the alternative to hunting? Is it preferable that deer die of disease and hunger? Or, as the editor of Adirondack Explorer magazine suggested, do we introduce wolves into the burbs?
To their credit, many environmentalists agree that hunting can be green. The New Jersey Audubon Society this year advocated deer hunting as an ecological necessity.
There's another reason to encourage hunting: it connects people with the outdoors and creates a broader constituency for wilderness preservation. At a time when America's wilderness is being gobbled away for logging, mining or oil drilling, that's a huge boon.
Granted, hunting isn't advisable in suburban backyards, and I don't expect many soccer moms to install gun racks in their minivans. But it's an abdication of environmental responsibility to eliminate other predators and then refuse to assume the job ourselves. In that case, the collisions with humans will simply get worse.
In October, for example, Wayne Goldsberry was sitting in a home in northwestern Arkansas when he heard glass breaking in the next room. It was a home invasion -- by a buck.
Mr. Goldsberry, who is six feet one inch and weighs 200 pounds, wrestled with the intruder for 40 minutes. Blood spattered the walls before he managed to break the buck's neck.
So it's time to reestablish a balance in the natural world -- by accepting the idea that hunting is as natural as bird-watching.
