----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
From: Wildlife (72824289)
To: (187926771)
Date: 12/18/2009 5:21:43 PM
Subject: Bowhunting at Trexler Widlife Presevrse - By Anthony Marr
NinLil (4887643)
Bowhunting at Trexler Widlife Presevrse - By Anthony Marr
AngeL For The Animals (432389247)
Deliberate Cruelty Is Sports Hunting (420352653)
Date: 12/18/2009 9:46:50 AM
Subject: Bowhunting at Trexler Widlife Presevrse - By Anthony Marr
A. Marr's invention key to saving urban deer from slaughter
Deer Auto-Assembler (DAA) the perfect non-violent and non-lethal urban
deer management tool
by Anthony Marr
While Japan is infamous for its 1000/yr pseudo-..scientific "Research" whaling and 22,000/yr dolphin slaughter, and Canada is notorious for its 300,000/yr Newfoundland seal hunt and the environmentally.. disastrous Alberta tar sands, the UnitedStates has an open secret, just as ugly, of wildlife exploitation thatis little known to even those who have been fighting American-..styletrophy hunting for years
In name, it is presented to the public by the consistently pro-hunting governments as "urban wildlife management" In fact, it is urban deer slaughter on a massive scale that is spreading like wildfire from city to city across the land The executioners vary, from expensive sharpshooters who charge $300-$500 per deer, to cruel captive-bolt operators who attempt to
shoot steel bolts into the thrashing head of the victim, often missing
the brain and hitting the eyes, and, most despicable of all, bow-hunters, whose statistical non-lethal wounding rate approximates 50% of all deer shot While the sharpshooters and captive-..bolters do it for money, the bow hunters do it for fun, pure and simple And by urban deer "culling" by how-hunters, we're talking about them shootingdeer with arrows in people's backyards In fact, almost all of the urban-..deer-..slaughters-..by-bow-hunters are driven by the bow-hunting lobby/..community/..industry
More often than not, the deer "..overpopulation".. problem, if/when it exists, is deliberatelycul..tivated by the hunting community for an excessiveness of deer forhunting purposes, which then offers itself as the solution to the
"problem" as a "favor" to the public Case in point - The Trexler
Wildlife Preserve in Allentown PA After 70 years of no-hunting in the
preserve with respect to the dying wish of General Trexler, they
reopened the preserve to bow-hunting in the name of ecological
protection of the preserve On opening day, I went into the preserve
with local activists Carol Loomis and Cheryl Baker, admidst hoards of
hunters hefting lethal-looking compound bows and quivers of broad-head
arrows And what did we see? If I were blind-folded and driven into
the preserve, then have the blind-fold removed, I would have guessed
that I was in a farm Acres of forest had been plowed down, with
food-plots of deer clover planted there instead, row on row Deer,
when well nourished, will maximize their reproductive potential, giving
birth to twins and triplets instead of none or singlets And this is
what the bow-hunters wanted, and did - wreck the forest, plant
food-plots, max out the deer reproductive rate, claim ecological damage
by deer overpopulation,.. offer themselves as saviors of the preserve, go
in and shoot deer with bow-and-arrow And we saw some of the
results
[For the pictures click here
To find the perfect solution, the first thing to realize is that culling as a population control measure does not work Take a piece of land with a carry capacity of, say 8 does If it contains 10 does, their total fawn crop would be
around 3 fawns, totaling 13 deer at the end of the year Whereas, if
the 10 does were reduced to 5 by culling, the remaining 5 does would
produce around 8 fawns in total, resulting again in 13 deer at the end
of the year This is called the Compensatory Rebound Effect (CRE)
The hunters know this, but the public does not, thus allowing the
hunters to have their self-..perpetuating way
The civilized solution for the Trexler Preserve, even if there is ecological damage due to deer, is to first eliminate the food-plots, and practice birth-control of deer, as we do cats, dogs and humans
The technology of Immuno-..Contraception (IC) is mature, technically
ready for field application, and approved by the FDA (2007)
Unfortunately, all governments on all levels, without a single
exception that I've seen - and I've seen a lot in my last 6 Compassion
for Animals Road Expeditions (CARE tours - see www. HOPE-CARE. org) -
are not only pro-hunting, but run by hunters.The state policy of New
Jersey, for example, is that of the 11 voting members of its Fish and
Game Department at least 6 must be hunters, and in fact, all 11 were
hunters the last time I checked Hunters dread IC like the plague, and
the governments have denied real world IC application since Day 1
However, due to the proven effectiveness of the IC technology, they
seldom attack the vaccine itself, but its methods of delivery, citing
expensiveness as the leading objection
In this they are not totally wrong The current methods of vaccine delivery
are indeed expensive, often costing several hundred dollars per deer,
when the vaccine itself costs less than $30 per dose The remote
delivery method (darting), is unreliable (e.g. dart hitting bone),
labor intensive, incomprehensive.. (since not all deer can be approached
within darting range), and tagging of vaccinated deer impermanent; it
is also restricted to the single-year liquid vaccine, thus
necessitating repeated annual applications Multi-year pellets have to
be manually injected by syringe, so deer have to first be captured
This is done currently by cage-traps. A cage trap can usually capture
only one deer per day, often overnight, and sometimes it captures an
already vaccinated deer The deer will then have to be wrestled to the
ground by two operators when a third will inject the vaccine The
trapping process and the physical handling have been known to be so
traumatic as to cause heart-attacks in the deer Thus, all in all,
both methods leave a lot to be desired, and are both labor-wise very
expensive
In view of this, I have proposed an alternative method of vaccine delivery employing a device called the Deer-..Auto-Assembler (DAA) This is a method of assembling deer I invented while working in deer control around India 's tiger reserves. It is simple, effective, labor-..unintensive and therefore inexpensive, and eminently adoptable for vaccine delivery in North America.
Basically, it involves creating a fenced area with one or more entrance
one-way-gates around the perimeter, and one exit one-way-gate at the
end of a narrow chute wide enough for only one deer at a time Enticed
by food, deer will enter the DAA through the entrance gate(s) After
enough deer have entered, and it could take days without the need for
human supervision, the entrance gate(s) can be locked, and the food can
be moved to the end of the narrow chute right next to the exit gate
The chute should be draped in black fabric so that the deer will be
calm and the human operator concealed from view Near the food trough,
where the feeding deer's rump would be, a U-shaped incision is cut in
the fabric, creating a hole covered by a flap When the deer is
feeding, the flap is lifted, the pellet is injected, the tag is attached, and the deer is then free to leave the DAA through the exit gate Other than constructing the DAA initially, very little human labor is needed to operate it.
Even without the use of IC, the DAA can still be employed to achieve its own end Suppose the government says that the maximum allowable concentration is 20 deer per sq mi, and the total area of a small city is 5 sq mi, the maximum allowable deer population would be 100 If the total population is 110, the bow-hunters would clammer for 20 deer culled by bow-..and-arrowin that city, leaving 90 This will create a food surplus, which willlead to a high reproductive rate, raising the total population back up
to 110 or higher the next year, thus justifying another round of
slaughter the next year, and the year after that, ad infinitum With a
DAA, no slaughter is needed, and no ecological damage is done. All
that needs to be done is to allow 10 does to enter the DAA, and keep
them there by supplementary feeding indefinitely If no bucks are
allowed in the DAA during the rut, the does would not reproduce The
outside population will be 200, their reproductive rate will be low,
and no environmental damge is done The DAA can be made visually
attractive by constructing it half in sunlight and half in forest
shade, to serve as a deer viewing facility I have seen such deer
viewing enclosures in which the setting is beautiful and the deer look
healthy and relaxed
All this said, I have to point out that we live in a conservative society in which "outside of thebox" ideas are not readily accepted The DAA concept is one such idea, and so far has not been taken seriously, even by some in the
anti-hunting community But if we want to defeat the urban deer
slaughter, I strongly believe that the DAA is the perfect
solution
Anthony Marr, founder and president
Heal Our Planet Earth (HOPE)
www.HOPE-CARE. org
www. MySpace.
com/AnthonyMarr
www.YouTube. com/AnthonyMarr
www...HomoSapiensSave..YourEarth. blogspot. com
www...ARConference.
org
604-222-1169
***
Plz sign my petition to abolish bowhunting click here
We need to forge the Global Anti-Hunting Coalition (GAHC) Please join,support and help by contacting Anthony Marr
Anthony Marr, founder and president
Heal Our Planet Earth (HOPE)
wwwHOPE-..CARE.org
