|
Post by hornharvester on Aug 11, 2006 10:14:29 GMT -5
In the October issue read the editors stump on page four by Daniel Schmidt. He says that we should let the professional biologist hired by the states manage their deer herds and the armchair biologists should stay out of it and let the professionals do their jobs.
Its a good article and right on the money. h.h.
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Aug 11, 2006 10:27:08 GMT -5
I couldn't agree more! OBR or no OBR, I would just like to know it was done by educated biologists, not by "trophy hunters" wanting bigger antlers. If I knew that it was strictly the biologists decision, I could live with it no problem.
Please, don't turn this into another OBR debate post.
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Aug 11, 2006 10:29:45 GMT -5
Here is the article
LET'S STOP ALL THE FUSSIN' AND THE FIGHTIN' By Daniel E. Schmidt
A 50-year-old man walks into the doctor’s office. He’s there to learn the results of his cancer screening. When the doctor arrives, the man immediately notice’s a serious tone in the physician’s demeanor.
“Well, Jack, you have some polyps,” the doctor reports. “So, we’re going to need to schedule a full colonoscopy so we can remove them.”
“Are they cancerous?” Jack asks.
“Probably not,” the doctor replies. “But if we don’t remove them, the situation will certainly get worse and could turn into cancer.”
Before leaving the clinic, Jack stops by the appointment desk to schedule his colonoscopy. He didn’t have to think twice, because, after all, the situation is pretty cut-and-dried: Get treated or suffer the eventual consequences. With a history of colon cancer in his family, it’s not really a matter of if Jack will get cancer, it’s when.
When talking about white-tailed deer management, I’ve used that cancer scenario more times than I can remember in recent years. My summary is always the same: If you have a scientific problem, hire a scientist — or in this case, a doctor — to solve it, or at the very least, prescribe a treatment.
In the case of many states’ overpopulated deer herds, my advice has always been: State agencies hire professional biologists to manage wildlife, so let them do their jobs. In other words, don’t let barstool biology dictate how deer are managed in your area. As D&DH has documented many times over the years, deer populations can be managed scientifically. More than 42 states have proven that over the past century by taking a nearly extirpated species and rebuilding it into the equivalent of modern-day rat colonies. Today’s problem, however, isn’t so much deer management — it’s people management.
The problems arise when hunting’s melting pot becomes infiltrated by greed, selfishness and partisan politics. In many ways, it seems we’ve transformed into Me Nation at a speed that surely has kept Aldo Leopold awake on his cloud.
Contrary to what some people believe, state agencies are not in cahoots with timber companies, environmental groups or the auto insurance industry to “kill off all the deer.” As far-fetched as that sounds, you wouldn’t believe how many times I’ve heard people spout such ill logic. Think about it for a minute: Without deer, these guys wouldn’t have jobs. Trust me, no one wants to kill off all the deer. At the very least, they want to produce quality deer and deer hunting experiences.
State-by-state bickering has been loudest, however, amongst ourselves. It seems that no state agency can do its job these days — actually manage deer in the best interests of the habitat — without offending one or more of hunting’s fraternities.
Holier-than-thou bow-hunters don’t want to share the woods with “lowly” gun-hunters. Antler-crazed gun-hunters don’t want to be told they have to earn their “horns” by shooting does. And, in some Northern states, hypocritical snowmobilers don’t want to share the woods with deer hunters out of fear they might get shot (a fear that’s obviously embraced without any review of their own safety statistics).
Round and round it goes. And it never stops. Ever.
Over the years, anyone who has thrown down their toys and screamed has won something in this contest. There have been few losers. Well, unless you count the deer, the habitat and deer hunting’s future.
As convoluted as this whole mess has become, there’s an easy answer: We hunters need to quit bickering, simply go hunting, and let the biologists do their jobs. If we did, we’d all have a lot more fun in the woods.
Wouldn’t that be nice?
|
|
|
Post by jstalljon on Aug 11, 2006 10:37:37 GMT -5
Excellent article.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Aug 11, 2006 10:46:04 GMT -5
EXCELLENT ARTICLE!!
Deer and Deer Hunting is by far my favorite "hunting" magazine.
|
|
|
Post by DEERTRACKS on Aug 11, 2006 10:46:24 GMT -5
Ditto.
|
|
|
Post by hunter480 on Aug 11, 2006 10:53:51 GMT -5
Deer & Deer Hunting is one of my favorite magazines too, and it`s very timely that you all are discussing it. I just yesterday received an e-mail from Dan Schmidt, telling me that they want to publish the article I sent for them to review.
They have their articles planned out so far in advance, Dan tells me that my piece won`t run until at least mid-2007, but I`m signing a publishing contract with them as soon as it arrives in the mail. This will be my very first article published.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Aug 11, 2006 10:56:03 GMT -5
Deer & Deer Hunting is one of my favorite magazines too, and it`s very timely that you all are discussing it. I just yesterday received an e-mail from Dan Schmidt, telling me that they want to publish the article I sent for them to review. They have their articles planned out so far in advance, Dan tells me that my piece won`t run until at least mid-2007, but I`m signing a publishing contract with them as soon as it arrives in the mail. This will be my very firat article published. My congratuations on your first published piece. May you have many, many more..
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Aug 11, 2006 11:38:05 GMT -5
The problems arise when hunting’s melting pot becomes infiltrated by greed, selfishness and partisan politics. In many ways, it seems we’ve transformed into Me Nation at a speed that surely has kept Aldo Leopold awake on his cloud.
Gotta LOVE It!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by dbd870 on Aug 11, 2006 12:20:50 GMT -5
More Dittos
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Aug 11, 2006 12:26:17 GMT -5
Deer & Deer Hunting is one of my favorite magazines too, and it`s very timely that you all are discussing it. I just yesterday received an e-mail from Dan Schmidt, telling me that they want to publish the article I sent for them to review. They have their articles planned out so far in advance, Dan tells me that my piece won`t run until at least mid-2007, but I`m signing a publishing contract with them as soon as it arrives in the mail. This will be my very firat article published. Congratulations hunter480, and be sure to remind us to look for it when it comes out! That is easily the least understood and most difficult part of a state biologists job. Not having to worry about the people management aspect is a huge advantage for private biologists.
|
|
|
Post by hunter480 on Aug 11, 2006 14:07:54 GMT -5
Thanks very much Woody and mbogo-I`me really excited about getting published at all, plus, Deer & Deer Hunting is a pretty major magazine for the first article.
I hope for this to be just the beginning, I don`t want to be a "one-hit wonder".
Thanks again guys. I`ll for sure let you know when it hits the magazine.
|
|
|
Post by dec on Aug 11, 2006 14:36:48 GMT -5
The problems arise when hunting’s melting pot becomes infiltrated by greed, selfishness and partisan politics. In many ways, it seems we’ve transformed into Me Nation at a speed that surely has kept Aldo Leopold awake on his cloud. You can read that article from either side of the coin and skew it how anyone wants. Nothing like a vague editorial to raise eyebrows and get people arguing, while not pointing the finger at anyone. Sounds like a politician to me.
|
|
|
Post by lugnutz on Aug 11, 2006 17:29:58 GMT -5
Why is it the biologist, never seem to explain their theories, and ideas on the things they do.
People would like to know why you would want 8 does killed to one buck, and their are several other questions that needs to be answered as well. Maybe a few answeres, and their wouldn't be soo many wanting them out of their jobs.
Lug
|
|
|
Post by kevin1 on Aug 11, 2006 17:50:09 GMT -5
I've never understood why people question the experts they retain to answer their questions when the subject is one dear to them , but thats human nature , I guess . Personally , I tend to trust people who have the quals to verify that they know more about a particular subject than I do , and I've rarely been disappointed with their assessment , even when their assessment was contrary to my own desires . I know bupkus about deer compared to someone who studies them for a living , and I'm perfectly willing to take the opinion of someone like an IDNR deer biologist at face value and plan my season around that , so I can't relate to someone who doesn't . I'm just a recreational hunter , what the hell do I know ?
|
|
|
Post by hunter480 on Aug 11, 2006 18:19:02 GMT -5
I would imagine that if asked, the biologists probably would explain what their rationale is-I`ve talked with Jim Mitchell a couple of times over the phone, and he is as nice a guy as you could ever talk with.
I do believe though that the professionals at the DNR do their jobs very well, and for the most part, we should yield to their expertise.
|
|
|
Post by kevin1 on Aug 11, 2006 18:46:16 GMT -5
480 , I've spoken with Dr. Mitchell and several other IDNR officials on several occasions , and they've always impressed me as knowing what they're speaking of , so why would I question their assessments ? My impression so far has been that they've more or less confirmed my own assessments , so I'm reluctant to challenge them . To be honest , I'm extremely reluctant to go to the the extreme that the hunters in Pennsylvania have gone to , so why should I condone any effort to legally question what our own DNR has done up until now ? After all , we do pay them to make the choices , should they not have some level of carte blanche ?
|
|
|
Post by hunter480 on Aug 11, 2006 18:55:56 GMT -5
Kevin 1-I agree completely, the pro`s have my vote of confidence.
|
|
|
Post by racktracker on Aug 11, 2006 20:09:04 GMT -5
Good article.
Most of our limit laws are purely social in nature.
|
|
|
Post by lugnutz on Aug 11, 2006 23:44:37 GMT -5
Our president should know more than us on how to run this country, yet we all still have questions. And he must make an attempt to tell us his why he chose to do what he does, whether everyone approves it or not.
I've never spoke with anyone from our DNR, and i'm sure they are friendly people. Friendly or not they still need to explain themselves on what they find and how they are going about their business. Especially to the onese that are paying their salary.
I didn't realize many states had on over populated deer herds! Bioligist manage wildlife?
They must be in "cahoots" with someone, its been well known the biologist wasn't in favor of the last major deer bag limit set 4 years ago. Doesn't the bag limit have something to do with manageing the wildlife?
Lug
|
|