No, not ALL of the land was suitable for deer. There were huge stretches of land that were not, but now are because humans have planted trees, shrubs, crops, etc., which make more habitat available for them than when the Pilgrims arrived. We studied all this extensively when I was working on my Masters in Zoology with a specialization in Wildlife Management years ago. Their numbers were down in the mid-20th C. because of over-hunting, but they've come back strong.
- see http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl...06/ai_20135606 since you have such a keen interest in deer populations and how hunting (and the lack thereof) has affected them.

Not that this has anything to do with hunting Tigers . . .

That's very interesting stuff, Phil.

Thanks for sharing.

It's the same problem whether you're 'hunting' deer or tigers. The animal has virtually no chance, since its habitat* is greatly diminished and it can easily be killed from a great distance. There's just no sport in it.


* Deer have eaten some of the bushes in my own back yard, but I wouldn't call that part of their habitat. It's just a place they can get some food when their limited habitat is running low.

First, deer and coyotes are domestic animals, understand the definition of "domestic". It means "existing or occuring inside a particular country", thats what I meant by domestic, not domesticated animals like cats. Use some common sense please. Secondly, stop encroaching on their habitat... are you kidding? I suppose you should go join a tribe of indians somewhere so that we can stop evolutionary/technological expansion all together. Where ever you live, where ever I live; its encroaching, so please, refrain from the hypocritical statements. Lastly, any senseless killing of animals is unfortunate, but you seem to be quite bitter about animal killing in general. Heres a though; we'll bring 20+ rats to your house, rats that have been "saved" from sewers and such from extermination and let them loose in your house. I'm sure that will bring things into perspective regarding "tolerable levels." Please, I beg you, use some common sense and logic when commenting on this post. Thanks.

Note that a semicolon is different from a period, which ends a sentence. The words "not foreign or international" do not constitute a third definition. They complete the second.



So neither definition applies to deer or coyotes, since both are found in more than one country and both are rarely kept as pets. I realize that it's become popular over the last six years to attack the messenger whenever you don't like the message, but please try to be accurate. OS 10.4.x comes with a built-in dictionary. Use it.



My Post #7 "I don't have a problem with the killing (I love a good steak) so much as the pretense that it's any different than a slaughter house."
As I said, it isn't the killing that bothers me. It's the macho b.s. demonstrated so effectively by Dick Cheney, a fat old guy with a heart condition who would never in his life put himself in a position where somebody might shoot back, going out to shoot caged birds in order to make himself feel like a real man.

The rest of your post borders on sheer nonsense. Perhaps you should do a little reading before further comment:

http://subscript.bna.com/SAMPLES/der...4?OpenDocument

http://jgrr.blogspot.com/2005/01/why...tat-alone.html

http://www.grist.org/advice/books/2001/12/12/point/

http://www.sierracampaign.org/GiantSequoia.html

Let’s encourage hunting under new rules!
 

If you hunt under currently accepted rules (which are horribly lopsided), then I believe you have a moral obligation to make use of the entire animal. Skinning it and handing the head for a taxidermist to mount on a piece of plywood as proof of your manhood to visitors of your abode, doesn’t count.

I think tiger hunting should be allowed -- but only with hand-held knives. Same with rhinoceros and elephants. And it must be winner-takes-all: If the hunter dies, then his or her entire fortune should be forfeited to secure habitats for the winner’s progeny.

Furthermore, heads of multinationals and major shareholders should be especially encouraged to hunt under these revised terms... :cool:


Barbarically yours,
ArcticStones

I think all hunting should be done by hand. If you want to hunt a tiger, or a deer, then you'll have to do it with your bare hands.

Good luck.

:)

BTW: cwtnospam, I also don't get why hunting deer with a gun makes people feel macho. It's like arm wrestling a five year old and feeling so great about it when you win.

Hmm... That would certainly reduce the catch figures of Norwegian and Japanese whaling, which is claimed to be done "for research purposes". But I think the efforts would make pretty darned good documentary for Animal Planet or National Geographic’s TV channel.


Now hold on a minute! That is a more radical proposition than even what I am suggesting.
:D
.

cwtnospam, maybe you should read up on what a "habitat" is. There's more suitable habitat for deer now than ever, unless one has a very idiosyncratic understanding of the term. You can admit to being wrong from time to time. ;)

This thread is rapidly becoming an embarassment to this forum. Counting down to closure. I think we do better when we stick to topics that are sorta kinda related to Mac/Apple.

Come on, Phil. A bit of surrealism spices up this forum; in fact more of it should be encouraged.

Besides, tigers eat Apples, so this is highly relevant.

by cwtnospam: Dick Cheney, a fat old guy with a heart condition who would never in his life put himself in a position where somebody might shoot back, going out to shoot caged birds in order to make himself feel like a real man.

Totally inappropriate! I had missed this. Can't see this discussion shedding any more light for the human race. Bye bye.