Hey PETA, Screw Wildlife

Page 1 of 2  
RACCOONS: dig up the old lady's annual flower garden, shit all over the decks, and tear up the cushions on deck furniture. Why? On three sides of this property, there are woods, farmland, ponds, and streams .... a wildlife paradise; yet they sometimes get on the roof and try to access the house. Why? Yes, I'll anti-freeze them and don't care who likes it.
WOODCHUCKS: are even worse digging burrows near the east side property line, but at least they have an excuse with the row of mulberry trees that defines that property line. Still, it's a bitch dodging the burrows on the tractor. I set a record this year by killing seven of them, two of whom while they were mating on -- believe it or not -- Valentine's Day. Heh.
WHITETAIL: deer can be dangerous, especially in autumn. One decided to live under a deck. He had an injured leg. He had absolutely no fear and would approach the old lady while she played in the perennial flower garden. Shotgun blasts did not scare him. One day while on a deck, I dropped a 10 lb. barbell plate on him. He was quick enough to dodge it but he finally got the message. He spent a few days down below by the pond but then disappeared.
WILLIE THE WILD TURKEY: adopted us one summer. He terrorized the cats, attacked his own reflection in auto bumpers, and slept on the roof, even in thunderstorms. The only good thing about Willie was that he exterminated most of the cricket population.
ASSORTED SMALL BIRDS: attack their reflections in windows and really create a mess. This year, a robin, last year, a lady cardinal, the year before that, a song sparrow.
Still, some wildlife is enjoyable. Young turkey vultures are friendly and inquisitive while you work outside. Their parents demonstrate a high degree of surgical skill extracting a brain from a deceased woodchuck or raccoon through the decedent's eye sockets. Interesting to observe. Then there were the pheasants strutting and eating a ton of bugs but they suddenly and mysteriously disappeared 20-25 years ago.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 09 Jul 2009 13:34:11 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@Home.org (Way Back Jack) wrote:

It sounds like you should move back to the city. Country life is too stressful for you.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@Home.org (Way Back Jack) wrote: Why don't you move to a nice retirement community, where you can be looked after by professionals?

--

- Billy

There are three kinds of men: The ones that learn by reading. The few who
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Geez...you haven't looked out my back door lately.
I live on 15 acres of nowhereness, northwest of Pittsburgh near the Ohio line. On any given day, 20 or 30 deer wander by, mostly at the treeline that abuts the open field of the next parcel, ~150ft behind the house. Local turkey flocks are positively routine, and I don't mean 5, I mean 30 or 40 at a time. Raccoons aren't too common, but I see them now and again. This year, there is a family of foxes living in the woods somewhere just southwest of the house who step now and again into the yard, generally at dawn or dusk.
The deer congregate most days in what we've long called "town hall", which is a low hollow inside the treeline on the far side of the power tower right-of-way, ~200yds due east of the house...except during hunting season, when they disappear for parts unknown. They figured out long ago when they need to make themselves scarce.
Then there's the possums that often befriend our cats for playful romps after dark. Add in the moles and voles that the cats hunt during the day. I can't say I'm sorry to see our feline Mighty Hunters having success in that department, as long as they don't bring gifts (or [worse] half-gifts) into the house. Coyotes avoid the house, but they are known to live in the woods down near the creek, still on my property but well toward the northeast corner of it.
No bears these days, at least none that we know of. But small stuff like toads and whatnot are everywhere.
I could feed my household using nothing but a crossbow, without ever having to step outside the yard immediately surrounding the house. All I have to do is wait for the game to show up.
It's a funny view of "the dying biosphere" that some folks have.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Karl Kleinpaste wrote:

If not for that Pittsburg thing I would have thought you were my neighbor - same senerio here. Someone shoulda told me the biosphere is dying so I could have filled up more freezers...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

And don't forget the ammo, and don't tell anyone that you've got food;O)
--

- Billy

There are three kinds of men: The ones that learn by reading. The few who
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
writes:

Little Billy Boy has never been outside his room in mommy's basement by the sounds of it...I have ALL the above as well bear and moose here in Maine and I live just 15-20 miles from a couple of cities...I keep the rodents thinned out as well...Porqupines , skunks , coons , tree rats and the such....You HAVE to..They are very destructive....I practice S S S (Shoot , Shovel , and Shutup)...I could easily live off hunting my property and fishing in the MANY streams in the area and the lake that is a mere 1/4 of a mile away...LOL...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Keep laughin'. At least that is good for you ;O) Otherwise you be dumber than dirt. Read the other posts for explanation.
--

- Billy

There are three kinds of men: The ones that learn by reading. The few who
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 09 Jul 2009 18:36:05 -0400, Karl Kleinpaste wrote:

I live on 195 acres of really "nowhereness" - in the traditional "big woods" hunting area of Northern PA. Except for whoever writes the PGC hunting outlook articles on their website and people trying to sell land, I doubt you'd find anyone who claims deer are plentiful here. In my immediate area there are perhaps 1/3 the number there were ten years ago.
There are several apparent factors, but imo #1 is over-hunting doe. Even before the PGC extended the rifle season from three to twelve days, some local hunter landowners were killing as many doe as possible, particularly targeting the "lead doe" (the older, experienced one in a group). Typically the landowner would also either plant or buy ear corn to feed the deer and other wildlife. The strategy was that surviving younger doe and fawns would be more likely to stay on the owner's land. The doe fawns were expendable; the primary objective was to grow their own buck.
To a point this did work, at least in terms of some deer becoming dependent. But imo what was overlooked was the higher fawn mortality and the fact that the larger, well nourished doe being killed were the ones more likely to have and raise fawns that would become large, healthy bucks. Plus, there is the PSU study that found the majority of buck fawns are driven from their birth territory by (1) doe in the next Spring and (2) mature buck that Fall. The black bear population is also in decline here.

But for how long ... assuming everyone else in your deer's range did the same thing?

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Where you live is your choice. You made the decision whether you bought it yourself or whether you inherited it and decided to stay there rather than sell.
The wildlife do not have the luxury of 'deciding' where to live. They were born there.

Indeed. A biosphere can apply just to a tiddling place such as where you live or it can apply to the whole planet.
You seem to think that just because you see a lot of biodiversity that it will always be there. It won't and you would know that if you took an interest in either history or environmental issues.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 08:21:02 -0400, Karl Kleinpaste wrote:

<...>
With the exception of Sundays and 12 days ending on Christmas, the statewide deer seasons in 2008-2009 ran from Oct.4 through Jan. 10.

What I wrote was: "I live ... in the traditional "big woods" hunting area of Northern PA." That's not an insignificant, "spot" region when discussing PA wildlife resources.

Those "human-controlled spaces" must be desirable or the deer wouldn't feed there.

No reasonable person would deny that - particularly in the 'burbs - deer/vehicle collisions are a problem. Probably the Erie Insurance company has done the most to actually study the causes and inform its policy holders.
The two week rifle deer season is part of the problem:
"Drivers should be extremely alert for deer while driving in November, which is peak mating season for deer and a time when a large number of deer claims occur. In Pennsylvania, the two-week hunting season that begins the Monday after Thanksgiving, is also a time when a large number of deer claims occur, particularly on opening day and the first Saturday of the season."
http://auto.erieinsurance.com/Deer-car-crashes.aspx

I'm going to assume that's tongue-in-cheek. A search of the Tribune-Review archives produces a number of articles about Canada Geese being "dealt with" in your area. Of course procedure does have to be followed; they are protected under the Migratory Bird Act.

Have you forgotten that you wrote: "The fact that spotty overhunting occurs, such as Ann claims, does not reflect on the whole state." You at least seem to be claiming that what you observe in your area is the norm.

The exchange was:
Karl wrote:
"I could feed my household using nothing but a crossbow, without ever having to step outside the yard immediately surrounding the house. All I have to do is wait for the game to show up."
Ann wrote:
"But for how long ... assuming everyone else in your deer's range did the same thing?"
It wasn't a "whine", just pointing out how ridiculous your claim that you "could feed your household" was.

<...>
You're kidding; that report is based on 1981-1990 data. One of the authors is from the Warren lab (ANF) and if you look at their later work, you'll find that some of the tree regeneration problem they attributed to deer is in fact due to exhaustion of soil buffering capacity due to acid rain.

Depends on what you call "local effects". My observation of deer numbers parallels that of hunters in my (Tioga) and adjoining counties, many of whom hunt public lands. According to what I've found, about 4% of Beaver County is public land; three Game Lands and one State Park, for a total of 19 square miles - the largest of which is Raccoon Creek State Park (7,572 acres). By contrast, about 30% of Tioga County is public land; one State Forest, four Game Lands, the COE holdings, and several State Parks, for a total of 341 square miles - the largest of which is Tioga State Forest (160,000 acres).
If you have any interest at all in the opinion of hunters, see the United Sportsmen of Pennsylvania website:
http://www.unifiedsportsmenpa.org /
The organization has sued the PGC, claiming it has mismanaged the deer on public land, because: "The PGC does not have a credible system for determining deer harvests, and consequently does not have an accurate count of how many deer actually exist in the Commonwealth."
You might also Google for PA hunter web forums,
Disclaimer: No, I haven't or am not now predicting the imminent demise of the white-tail deer in PA.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Actually, "biosphere" refers to the earth and all living and organic matter. But it isn't dying. It is shifting, perhaps, as it always has.
This is not an excuse, of course, to crap in our own nest, but panicky rhetoric (like declining polar bear population, which applied to a single population of polar bears, while worldwide numbers showed a slight increase) serves only to increase cynicism.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

matter. But it isn't dying. It is shifting, perhaps, as it always has. ______________________________________- Of course it is dying! But then it is also shifting.
What you probably mean is that it is not dying in our lifetime.

rhetoric (like declining polar bear population, which applied to a single population of polar bears, while worldwide numbers showed a slight increase) serves only to increase cynicism. ___________________________________________ Indeed. But I get similarly cynical when I see a referral to 'worldwide' number of polar bears when they don't live worldwide. They only live in the Arctic.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 11 Jul 2009 18:24:48 +1000, FarmI wrote:

And, the claim that only one population is decreasing is apparently based on old information. According to 15th PBSG meeting (this month):
"Reviewing the latest information available the PBSG concluded that 1 of 19 subpopulations is currently increasing, 3 are stable and 8 are declining. For the remaining 7 subpopulations available data were insufficient to provide an assessment of current trend."
http://pbsg.npolar.no/en/meetings/press-releases/15-Copenhagen.html
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ann wrote:

Here's the fix. Put these animals in zoos. Once a sufficient number of zoos have breeding populations, we can take the animals habitat off the endangered-whatever list. From then on, the animal is invulnerable to:
* Global warming, * Global cooling, * Pollution, * Discarded plastic bags, * Shopping malls and loss of habitat, * Humans poking them with sticks, * Predation from other animals, * Anything.
This plan solves the " 'X' will become extinct by Friday!" business. Those who insist that all creatures get three hots, a cot, suitable entertainment, freedom of travel, and the right to bear arms, however, will probably not be satisfied.
We can put THEM in zoos...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

But not budget restraints. Boston talking about closing zoo and offing the animals. http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/07/12/news_o f_zoos8217_financial_woes_stuns/
http://preview.tinyurl.com/nebcnu
--
Searching is half the fun: life is much more manageable when thought
of as a scavenger hunt as opposed to a surprise party.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Kurt Ullman wrote:

Yep, I saw that. Too bad the economy's in such bad shape - some enterprising entrepreneur could take a flyer and offer "Giraffe Burgers" or similar.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You are a lucky man Karl, and I hope your luck holds. 50 years ago, there were 3 billion people on this planet. Now there are 6 billion. In 40 years there will be 9 billion. I've heard 9 billion to be the max, that this ol' planet can support, even with a greatly reduced life style.
If our old friends famine, war, and pestilence don't get our offspring, then there is
"Impact from the Deep"
Strangling heat and gases emanating from the earth and sea, not asteroids, most likely caused several ancient mass extinctions. Could the same killer-greenhouse conditions build once again? http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&colID=1&articleID 037A5D- A938-150E-A93883414B7F0000
Enjoy it while you got it.
--

- Billy

There are three kinds of men: The ones that learn by reading. The few who
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Thomas Mathus put the number considerably lower, Lower, in fact, than we reached before 1950. He used mwhat passed for unassailable statistics at the time. Obviously he was wrong.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@here.org (Vladimir Tschenko Badenov) wrote:

And your cite that it is a hoax is . . .?

Speaking for myself, I don't like the out look. You didn't look at http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&colID=1&articleID 037A5D- A938-150E-A93883414B7F0000 "Impact from the Deep", did you?

I don't talk Neo-Nutcake. What are you trying to say?

Citation please.

Cite please.

Let me know when you do that. In the meantime the Union of Concerned Scientists (you remember them, they were right about the ozone hole, http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/science/faq-abou t-ozone-depletion-and.html and "acid rain". http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/coalvswind/c02c.html ) really don't like "Global Warming" that much either. http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/global_warming_101 /
--

- Billy

There are three kinds of men: The ones that learn by reading. The few who
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.