[BCNnet] better habitat coming in DuPage
Robbie Hunsinger
redstart1@earthlink.net
Fri, 07 Nov 2003 17:58:15 -0600
> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
--B_3151072695_1943918
Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
I didn=B9t mean to stir up a hot topic!
> asked one of tha animal ecologists at FPDDC about this a few years ago. =
One
> of the problems with this method is that they can't tell which deer have =
been
> injected and which haven't. What happens if the same doe gets multiple
> injections? How will they know if they injected the number of deer they =
think
> they need to inject to achieve a stable population?
>=20
I would think there would be ways to mark the does that have the
contraceptive so that they wouldn=B9t re-catch the same deer. I would think
they could easily put a collar or a tag or a mark or something that could
distinguish the treated does. They do this with other animals quite often. =
I
would think how many to inject would be worth finding out.
Don't you think those deer are tramautized when trapped and neutered?
This is an interesting point as well. I would think if marksmen shot them
with tranquilizers that this would be as least traumatic as possible,
assuming they didn=B9t injure themselves on the fall. They would be knocked
out for the administration of the contraceptive. It would of course be muc=
h
less traumatic than being shot dead with a bullet.
The contraceptive I am talking about is not getting tubes tied, it is
something closer to the ID chips that people get put into their pets. The
meds are bigger than that but very thin from what I understand. I am not
sure it evens counts as surgery really.
And,what will be the repercussions of all this down the road? If males mat=
e
with neutered deer, and find that young are not being produced, will that
bring in a new herd of "fertile" deer into the "unwanted territory"? The
trap and neuter program is just another attempt to assuage animal rights
activists without really solving the problem of overdevelopment, lost
habitat and misused land.
I surely don=B9t know what deer think, but my guess would be that the mating
instinct is paramount and that if that could occur as usual, that the lack
of offspring wouldn=B9t necessarily create and influx of new deer. I really
don=B9t know of course. I don=B9t know about any long term studies at this
point. I do know that the culling approach doesn=B9t really solve anything.
More deer are born and more are killed-every year. This doesn=B9t make much
sense to me. There may simply not be any other good options at the moment
but I am curious about the alternatives.
Obviously the problem is lack of habitat and no predators. We are totally
responsible for that environment and maybe because of that, I feel that we
should explore the most humane way to deal with the problem. If a
contraceptive works for a long period of time, that would save many deer
from dying by the bullet and it would save the FP sharpshooters from having
to cull. I imagine it would save habitat and save us tax dollars as well.
It is an interesting subject and I look forward to hearing the different
perspectives on this subject.
Robbie Hunsinger
--B_3151072695_1943918
Content-type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: [BCNnet] better habitat coming in DuPage</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<FONT FACE=3D"Palatino">I didn’t mean to stir up a hot topic!<BR>
<BR>
</FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE=3D"Palatino"> asked one of tha animal ecologist=
s at FPDDC about this a few years ago. One of the problems with this m=
ethod is that they can't tell which deer have been injected and which haven'=
t. What happens if the same doe gets multiple injections? How wi=
ll they know if they injected the number of deer they think they need to inj=
ect to achieve a stable population?<BR>
<BR>
</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE=3D"Palatino"><BR>
I would think there would be ways to mark the does that have the contracept=
ive so that they wouldn’t re-catch the same deer. I would think they c=
ould easily put a collar or a tag or a mark or something that could di=
stinguish the treated does. They do this with other animals quite often. I w=
ould think how many to inject would be worth finding out.<BR>
<BR>
</FONT><FONT FACE=3D"Monaco"><TT>Don't you think those deer are tramaut=
ized when trapped and neutered?<BR>
</TT></FONT><FONT FACE=3D"Palatino"><BR>
This is an interesting point as well. I would think if marksmen shot them w=
ith tranquilizers that this would be as least traumatic as possible, assumin=
g they didn’t injure themselves on the fall. They would be knock=
ed out for the administration of the contraceptive. It would of course=
be much less traumatic than being shot dead with a bullet.<BR>
<BR>
The contraceptive I am talking about is not getting tubes tied, it is somet=
hing closer to the ID chips that people get put into their pets. The meds ar=
e bigger than that but very thin from what I understand. I am not sure it ev=
ens counts as surgery really. <BR>
<BR>
</FONT><FONT FACE=3D"Monaco"><TT>And,what will be the repercussions of all th=
is down the road? If males mate<BR>
with neutered deer, and find that young are not being produced, will that<B=
R>
bring in a new herd of "fertile" deer into the "unwanted ter=
ritory"? The<BR>
trap and neuter program is just another attempt to assuage animal rights<BR=
>
activists without really solving the problem of overdevelopment, lost<BR>
habitat and misused land.<BR>
</TT></FONT><FONT FACE=3D"Palatino"><BR>
I surely don’t know what deer think, but my guess would be that the m=
ating instinct is paramount and that if that could occur as usual, tha=
t the lack of offspring wouldn’t necessarily create and influx of new =
deer. I really don’t know of course. I don’t know about an=
y long term studies at this point. I do know that the culling approach doesn=
’t really solve anything. More deer are born and more are killed-every=
year. This doesn’t make much sense to me. There may simply not be any=
other good options at the moment but I am curious about the alternatives.<B=
R>
<BR>
Obviously the problem is lack of habitat and no predators. We are totally r=
esponsible for that environment and maybe because of that, I feel that we sh=
ould explore the most humane way to deal with the problem. If a contraceptiv=
e works for a long period of time, that would save many deer from dying by t=
he bullet and it would save the FP sharpshooters from having to cull. I imag=
ine it would save habitat and save us tax dollars as well. <BR>
<BR>
It is an interesting subject and I look forward to hearing the different pe=
rspectives on this subject.<BR>
<BR>
Robbie Hunsinger<BR>
</FONT>
</BODY>
</HTML>
--B_3151072695_1943918--