Arlington Co. and its deer problem

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Venison jerky is pretty good. Do they at least butcher the deer they shoot?

They do and are planning to donate it to the AFAC food pantries. Another uproar going on there.

I think Arlington should hold a public referendum to decide the venison jerky flavors. We can't leave a decision like that to a corporate overlord.

I think we should hold a referendum on shooting indigenous animals.

Most local governments only allow public referendums for issues that don't matter, or where the outcome is already known.

The last exception to this was the meal tax referendum in Fairfax County.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Venison jerky is pretty good. Do they at least butcher the deer they shoot?

They do and are planning to donate it to the AFAC food pantries. Another uproar going on there.

I think Arlington should hold a public referendum to decide the venison jerky flavors. We can't leave a decision like that to a corporate overlord.

I think we should hold a referendum on shooting indigenous animals.

How would you like to kill them instead?

[Anonymous]

The easiest and most cost effective thing to do is simply allow nature to restore the balance with starvation and disease as the limiting factor.

When there’s not enough forage left for them, many deer will starve to death, and others not killed by starvation will be sufficiently weakened that they will be vulnerable to disease outbreaks. These two factors will eventually reduce the population of deer down to what the environment can sustain.



In short: do nothing. Nature will handle it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The easiest and most cost effective thing to do is simply allow nature to restore the balance with starvation and disease as the limiting factor.

When there’s not enough forage left for them, many deer will starve to death, and others not killed by starvation will be sufficiently weakened that they will be vulnerable to disease outbreaks. These two factors will eventually reduce the population of deer down to what the environment can sustain.



In short: do nothing. Nature will handle it.

Evolution will favor the stronger and smarter deer. Eventually, these deer will run for seats in the local government. Is that what you want?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The easiest and most cost effective thing to do is simply allow nature to restore the balance with starvation and disease as the limiting factor.

When there’s not enough forage left for them, many deer will starve to death, and others not killed by starvation will be sufficiently weakened that they will be vulnerable to disease outbreaks. These two factors will eventually reduce the population of deer down to what the environment can sustain.



In short: do nothing. Nature will handle it.

That's not really natural, though. Naturally we'd have predators. If you want nature to handle it, introduce predators.

[Anonymous]

There is deer birth control PZP or GonaCon you can dart them. Arlington didn't consider it. Their alternative to shooting was spaying. Staff rigged it to favor shooting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is deer birth control PZP or GonaCon you can dart them. Arlington didn't consider it. Their alternative to shooting was spaying. Staff rigged it to favor shooting.

And what happens when the dart misses the deer and hits a child? So the child will now be infertile or chemically hormonally altered for life?

Your suggestion is as dumb as shooting them with guns. And just as dangerous to the children of Arlington.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is deer birth control PZP or GonaCon you can dart them. Arlington didn't consider it. Their alternative to shooting was spaying. Staff rigged it to favor shooting.

And what happens when the dart misses the deer and hits a child? So the child will now be infertile or chemically hormonally altered for life?

Your suggestion is as dumb as shooting them with guns. And just as dangerous to the children of Arlington.

Wow, the pp's post was pretty dumb, but you managed to top it. Congrats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the sterilization program was a dismal failure. Look no one thinks you can kill large animals with no pain and we should do the best we can but some of them need to die. Do you think a lion is killing a gazelle without any pain?

A lion kills with a single bite to the spine, severing the spinal cord. It's pretty quick after the lion tackles the prey. House cats would do the same to their prey animals, but no one teaches them the technique.

Yeah they are taught to toy with the prey, half kill it then let kittens toy with it until they get hungry or bored

[Anonymous]

Two deer were fighting in my backyard then a woman walked by with a toddler in a stroller and stopped to show the baby the deer. She was dangerously close. Huge antlers on both. They are more than a nuisance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The easiest and most cost effective thing to do is simply allow nature to restore the balance with starvation and disease as the limiting factor.

When there’s not enough forage left for them, many deer will starve to death, and others not killed by starvation will be sufficiently weakened that they will be vulnerable to disease outbreaks. These two factors will eventually reduce the population of deer down to what the environment can sustain.



In short: do nothing. Nature will handle it.

Evolution will favor the stronger and smarter deer. Eventually, these deer will run for seats in the local government. Is that what you want?

Yes. What really needs to be culled here are people, not deer. If deer were in the local government, that would finally happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The easiest and most cost effective thing to do is simply allow nature to restore the balance with starvation and disease as the limiting factor.

When there’s not enough forage left for them, many deer will starve to death, and others not killed by starvation will be sufficiently weakened that they will be vulnerable to disease outbreaks. These two factors will eventually reduce the population of deer down to what the environment can sustain.



In short: do nothing. Nature will handle it.

Evolution will favor the stronger and smarter deer. Eventually, these deer will run for seats in the local government. Is that what you want?

Yes. What really needs to be culled here are people, not deer. If deer were in the local government, that would finally happen.

+1. If the deer vote to remove the remove the weak and dumb people, that’s something I could get behind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the sterilization program was a dismal failure. Look no one thinks you can kill large animals with no pain and we should do the best we can but some of them need to die. Do you think a lion is killing a gazelle without any pain?

A lion kills with a single bite to the spine, severing the spinal cord. It's pretty quick after the lion tackles the prey. House cats would do the same to their prey animals, but no one teaches them the technique.

Yeah they are taught to toy with the prey, half kill it then let kittens toy with it until they get hungry or bored

Lions do that too.

[Anonymous]

The discussions here about how big cats kill their prey is funny... these things, not all, regularly tear open and eat their prey while it is still alive. No, they are not humane, not in any way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The discussions here about how big cats kill their prey is funny... these things, not all, regularly tear open and eat their prey while it is still alive. No, they are not humane, not in any way.

The big cat families are known for killing by severing the spine with a single bite. They don't have the stamina to chase prey for hours. Wolves hunt differently, as a group, exhausting their prey until it collapses. That's a long, drawn out death.