The HuntingPA.com Outdoor Community banner

1 - 20 of 138 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,316 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Not sure why the link it's automatically directing.

Copy and paste it into your browser.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,565 Posts
Anyone want to buy a railroad bridge here in NEPA. If you read this and come away thinking mice are killing deer of any age you have watched too much Monty Python. Waugh!

The bridge for a fact can be purchased from the felon that owns it or his sister or the lawyer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,161 Posts
bohunr said:
really lowers my opinion of the studies they conduct at Penn State.
You do realize it was tongue in cheek, right? They're joking around. Mouse DNA showed up in the test results, because mice had visited the carcasses after the deer had died, and chewed on various things. i.e. The deer itself, the tracking devices, collars, etc. The mice never killed a single deer, and no one from PSU, or the PGC thinks/thought they did, even for a second.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,158 Posts
With many game numbers down, and predators in many cases being a major cause, you would not think anyone would be joking around. The more predators you have the more they need to eat. With small game when raptors were protected, small game numbers were reduced, or wiped out as with pheasants. This included areas with good habitat. As coyote, bear, fisher, eagle and bobcat numbers have risen, deer numbers have dropped. Higher predator numbers need to eat more and will keep increasing in numbers till either there is not enough food to support the numbers and they have to move to greener pastures or man is able to reduce predator numbers. Do we really need predators in high enough numbers to threaten the sport of hunting?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
14,401 Posts
bpottorff said:
With many game numbers down, and predators in many cases being a major cause, you would not think anyone would be joking around. The more predators you have the more they need to eat. With small game when raptors were protected, small game numbers were reduced, or wiped out as with pheasants. This included areas with good habitat. As coyote, bear, fisher, eagle and bobcat numbers have risen, deer numbers have dropped. Higher predator numbers need to eat more and will keep increasing in numbers till either there is not enough food to support the numbers and they have to move to greener pastures or man is able to reduce predator numbers. Do we really need predators in high enough numbers to threaten the sport of hunting?
Once again you prove that you don't understand the predator/prey relationship. The prey populations control the predator numbers. It is not the other way around as you keep trying to convince everyone.

Most of us knew the deer blog concerning mouse DNA was in jest as soon as we read it. We also know why mouse DNA would be present. It is not at all uncommon for dead animals to have many difference species that feed on them, leaving some DNA evidence.

Dick Bodenhorn
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,565 Posts
You better not read the onion. It could make you cry. Waugh!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,045 Posts
Would've been better on 4/1 LOL
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,158 Posts
R.S.B. your right prey do control predator numbers. When predators deplete their prey they move to an area with more prey. They don't just lay down and starve. Look how far bear and coyotes travel. And hawks migrate long distances. We as humans get to hunt for what is left after the other predators have their chance. The more predation, the less for human hunters. We as humans help with habitat, and pay to help game. We just have to decide when you have enough predators. If you lose 30% of fawns is that good, or what if we lose ninety%. As hunters you have to decide if you don't mind not seeing deer because numbers are so low. Man is a predator too. This whole thing about prey controlling predator numbers happens when your game or prey numbers get so low that the predators are no longer there because they have a hard time finding a meal. We should try not to get to the point of letting predators control the prey numbers. It only hurts hunting as a sport because it will result in less hunting. Look at the areas upstate where deer numbers are low, we see less hunters. And when raptors were protected and our small game numbers were greatly reduced, we now see less people hunting small game. When we let prey numbers determine predator numbers we are too far gone. Some game like pheasants have never been able to come back with out predator control. Man should control predators and do our best to lower predation to help preserve our sport. Anti hunters would love to see the point where predators control game numbers to the point that we don't need human hunters.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,615 Posts
Borden811 said:
bohunr said:
really lowers my opinion of the studies they conduct at Penn State.
You do realize it was tongue in cheek, right? They're joking around. Mouse DNA showed up in the test results, because mice had visited the carcasses after the deer had died, and chewed on various things. i.e. The deer itself, the tracking devices, collars, etc. The mice never killed a single deer, and no one from PSU, or the PGC thinks/thought they did, even for a second.
When your "joke" requires an official explanation, perhaps humor is no your thing!

The blog entry appears to have had more of an Orson Wells effect. The constant complaining about one's job was bad enough, but this event may have hit a new low.
Spare me the boring personal & off-topic ramblings and just give me the facts about deer & forests.

One thing for sure, Fleegle is no Gary Alt
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,378 Posts
I don't believe that.In order for that to happen,we'd have to have a lot of predators living very close to those people and they're afraid of the predators.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,978 Posts
dce said:
I don't believe that.In order for that to happen,we'd have to have a lot of predators living very close to those people and they're afraid of the predators.
This has been brainstormed by the left. Fencing would solve that. You should spend some time lurking leftist message boards...get a good laugh over the brainstorming of how to get guns...reduce the need.

They believe that introducing predators to keep game numbers in check will weaken the gun lobby. Many advocate for wolves.
 
1 - 20 of 138 Posts
Top