"X ` Man" wrote in message
m...

On 5/3/12 8:25 PM, Richard Casady wrote:
On Thu, 03 May 2012 18:44:24 -0400, X `
wrote:

On 5/3/12 4:50 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 03 May 2012 12:54:44 -0400, John
wrote:

...and those who find hunters despicable.

http://dribbleglass.com/images/billboards/animals.jpg

More species are saved by hunters than all the PETA and "save the
animals" kooks combined.

Hunters put their money where their mouth is and they actually do
things to preserve habitat and encourage species survival. They don't
just whine about it.

BTW I don't hunt.

I'd be impressed if the "hunters" preserved habitat and didn't kill the
animals on it.

I live just outside Des Moines, and the local deer are so numerous as
to be catagorized as vermin. I lost an auto to one. They cross my lawn
on a daily basis. It would be great if hunters would kill vast numbers
of them.

Casady


Typically, the problem you describe is the result of man encroaching on
the natural habit of woodland critters and decimating it. So, we take
away the land on which critters live, eat, and breathe, and then we
shoot them.


-----------------------------------------------
This is more the result of man killing the predators and then growing great
food crops for the deer. A lot more deer than the natural world would
support.

On 5/4/2012 12:36 PM, Califbill wrote:
"X ` Man" wrote in message
m...

On 5/3/12 8:25 PM, Richard Casady wrote:
On Thu, 03 May 2012 18:44:24 -0400, X `
wrote:

On 5/3/12 4:50 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 03 May 2012 12:54:44 -0400, John
wrote:

...and those who find hunters despicable.

http://dribbleglass.com/images/billboards/animals.jpg

More species are saved by hunters than all the PETA and "save the
animals" kooks combined.

Hunters put their money where their mouth is and they actually do
things to preserve habitat and encourage species survival. They don't
just whine about it.

BTW I don't hunt.

I'd be impressed if the "hunters" preserved habitat and didn't kill the
animals on it.

I live just outside Des Moines, and the local deer are so numerous as
to be catagorized as vermin. I lost an auto to one. They cross my lawn
on a daily basis. It would be great if hunters would kill vast numbers
of them.

Casady


Typically, the problem you describe is the result of man encroaching on
the natural habit of woodland critters and decimating it. So, we take
away the land on which critters live, eat, and breathe, and then we
shoot them.


-----------------------------------------------
This is more the result of man killing the predators and then growing
great food crops for the deer. A lot more deer than the natural world
would support.


How many trees had to be cut down to build Harry's cave? How many more
trees had to be cut down to make room for Harry's cave? Besides causing
the loss of habitat, Harry feeds the wild animals to lure them back to
where their habitat was destroyed. Harry loves interacting with the
wildlife from the safety of his IPE deck.
If it sounds like Harry is one sick ****, that's because he is.

wrote in message ...

On Fri, 4 May 2012 09:36:59 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote:

This is more the result of man killing the predators and then growing great
food crops for the deer. A lot more deer than the natural world would
support.

That is true.
There are far more deer in the US, particularly the east, than there
were when the Mayflower landed.
Crops are a real gravy train for them but it turns out that they also
thrive on ornamental plants in suburbia. I am still not sure why they
were on the Whitehurst freeway that night but I assume it was just a
short cut from the yummy food up on Foxhall road and the parkland in
Foggy Bottom.


------------------------------------------------
I live about 3 blocks from open space. Have had deer eat the roses, (local
nursery never has to prune their roses.) and eat the hibiscus on the front
porch. We have a mountain lion or 3 in the area. Friends have a sheep
ranch and had to have the state hunter kill one last year. They have been
seen on the local middle school grounds and the primary school. Probably
same lion as was same day. Grocery shopping? Lots of deer in the area. As
well as turkeys, that are not a native California bird. Almost hit one
today leaving town as it walked across the road. 55 mph speed limit. Most
of the game is because the hunters put up the money for the refuges.

On Fri, 04 May 2012 13:01:15 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 4 May 2012 09:36:59 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote:

This is more the result of man killing the predators and then growing great
food crops for the deer. A lot more deer than the natural world would
support.

That is true.
There are far more deer in the US, particularly the east, than there
were when the Mayflower landed.
Crops are a real gravy train for them but it turns out that they also
thrive on ornamental plants in suburbia. I am still not sure why they
were on the Whitehurst freeway that night but I assume it was just a
short cut from the yummy food up on Foxhall road and the parkland in
Foggy Bottom.

We have a herd of at least six, that I saw last year, roaming our damn neighborhood. I am a long way
from the 'country'.

The anti-hunter ideas of 'saving the wildlife' are pure bull****. Africa is a different story, but
we're not talking about shooting elephants and tigers.

I expect those who talk about shooting 'fish in a barrel' have never tried to hit a quail or
pheasant on the fly or gone rabbit hunting with a .22 (and brought home dinner).

On 5/5/12 1:47 PM, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 04 May 2012 13:01:15 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 4 May 2012 09:36:59 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote:

This is more the result of man killing the predators and then growing great
food crops for the deer. A lot more deer than the natural world would
support.

That is true.
There are far more deer in the US, particularly the east, than there
were when the Mayflower landed.
Crops are a real gravy train for them but it turns out that they also
thrive on ornamental plants in suburbia. I am still not sure why they
were on the Whitehurst freeway that night but I assume it was just a
short cut from the yummy food up on Foxhall road and the parkland in
Foggy Bottom.

We have a herd of at least six, that I saw last year, roaming our damn neighborhood. I am a long way
from the 'country'.

The anti-hunter ideas of 'saving the wildlife' are pure bull****. Africa is a different story, but
we're not talking about shooting elephants and tigers.

I expect those who talk about shooting 'fish in a barrel' have never tried to hit a quail or
pheasant on the fly or gone rabbit hunting with a .22 (and brought home dinner).


It takes a real man to shoot a tiny bird like a quail.

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 04 May 2012 13:01:15 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 4 May 2012 09:36:59 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote:

This is more the result of man killing the predators and then growing great
food crops for the deer. A lot more deer than the natural world would
support.

That is true.
There are far more deer in the US, particularly the east, than there
were when the Mayflower landed.
Crops are a real gravy train for them but it turns out that they also
thrive on ornamental plants in suburbia. I am still not sure why they
were on the Whitehurst freeway that night but I assume it was just a
short cut from the yummy food up on Foxhall road and the parkland in
Foggy Bottom.

We have a herd of at least six, that I saw last year, roaming our damn neighborhood. I am a long way
from the 'country'.

The anti-hunter ideas of 'saving the wildlife' are pure bull****. Africa is a different story, but
we're not talking about shooting elephants and tigers.

I expect those who talk about shooting 'fish in a barrel' have never tried to hit a quail or
pheasant on the fly or gone rabbit hunting with a .22 (and brought home dinner).

No, it's not bull****. My uncle's father, who lived to be 99 used to
tell me stories when I was a kid. He was a son of a farmer, then a
farmer in the middle of no where. He never saw a deer until he was in
his 30's because before they started regulating the hunt, they were
almost wiped out.

On Sat, 5 May 2012 16:45:18 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 04 May 2012 13:01:15 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 4 May 2012 09:36:59 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote:

This is more the result of man killing the predators and then growing great
food crops for the deer. A lot more deer than the natural world would
support.

That is true.
There are far more deer in the US, particularly the east, than there
were when the Mayflower landed.
Crops are a real gravy train for them but it turns out that they also
thrive on ornamental plants in suburbia. I am still not sure why they
were on the Whitehurst freeway that night but I assume it was just a
short cut from the yummy food up on Foxhall road and the parkland in
Foggy Bottom.

We have a herd of at least six, that I saw last year, roaming our damn neighborhood. I am a long way
from the 'country'.

The anti-hunter ideas of 'saving the wildlife' are pure bull****. Africa is a different story, but
we're not talking about shooting elephants and tigers.

I expect those who talk about shooting 'fish in a barrel' have never tried to hit a quail or
pheasant on the fly or gone rabbit hunting with a .22 (and brought home dinner).

No, it's not bull****. My uncle's father, who lived to be 99 used to
tell me stories when I was a kid. He was a son of a farmer, then a
farmer in the middle of no where. He never saw a deer until he was in
his 30's because before they started regulating the hunt, they were
almost wiped out.

Kevin, you just made the case for today's hunting laws. They bring back the animals. Now, there
needs to be more hunting to thin the population enough such that the rest of the herds can remain
healthy.

Thanks for your insightful post. Well done.

On 5/5/12 6:29 PM, John H. wrote:

Now, there
needs to be more hunting to thin the population enough such that the rest of the herds can remain
healthy.


I agree. We need to thin out conservatives.

“Today’s so-called ‘conservatives’ don’t even know what the word means.
They think I’ve turned liberal because I believe a woman has a right to
an abortion. That’s a decision that’s up to the pregnant woman, not up
to the pope or some do-gooders or the Religious Right. It’s not a
conservative issue at all.”
~Barry Goldwater

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 5 May 2012 16:45:18 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 04 May 2012 13:01:15 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 4 May 2012 09:36:59 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote:

This is more the result of man killing the predators and then growing great
food crops for the deer. A lot more deer than the natural world would
support.

That is true.
There are far more deer in the US, particularly the east, than there
were when the Mayflower landed.
Crops are a real gravy train for them but it turns out that they also
thrive on ornamental plants in suburbia. I am still not sure why they
were on the Whitehurst freeway that night but I assume it was just a
short cut from the yummy food up on Foxhall road and the parkland in
Foggy Bottom.

We have a herd of at least six, that I saw last year, roaming our damn neighborhood. I am a long way
from the 'country'.

The anti-hunter ideas of 'saving the wildlife' are pure bull****. Africa is a different story, but
we're not talking about shooting elephants and tigers.

I expect those who talk about shooting 'fish in a barrel' have never tried to hit a quail or
pheasant on the fly or gone rabbit hunting with a .22 (and brought home dinner).

No, it's not bull****. My uncle's father, who lived to be 99 used to
tell me stories when I was a kid. He was a son of a farmer, then a
farmer in the middle of no where. He never saw a deer until he was in
his 30's because before they started regulating the hunt, they were
almost wiped out.

Kevin, you just made the case for today's hunting laws. They bring back the animals. Now, there
needs to be more hunting to thin the population enough such that the rest of the herds can remain
healthy.

Thanks for your insightful post. Well done.

Oh, you poor stupid man (and in your case I use the term man very
lightly). You still think I'm Kevin!!!!