How ’bout no? Just straight no. Fuck the question, the answer is just no.
Ok, so there’s got to be a reason I went straight for no. Enter this recent article by Fox News saying that states in the Northeast, namely New Jersey and New York, are considering introducing or re-introducing Cougars (like mountain lions, not the hot-ass MILFs you’re used to scouting at ladies night sipping dollar drinks with no cover) to the area. Why Pre-Tel? According to the article, “They say the 220-pound predators are a natural solution to a problem that causes 1.2 milllion car accidents per year, including 200 fatalities.”
“Recolonization by large carnivores could provide an efficient solution to the problem of deer overabundance,” wrote study authors Laura Prugh, a wildlife scientist at the University of Washington; Sophie Gilbert, a wildlife ecologist at the University of Idaho and several colleagues.” All of which have obviously smoke way to much weed in their tenure.
“While the authors acknowledge “large carnivore recolonization” could lead to attacks on humans, pets and livestock, the number of lives lost would be far less than the number of lives saved.” It then goes on to claim that “Auto accidents attributed to deer also are blamed for $1.66 billion in damages and 29,000 injuries to people, making them the “most dangerous large mammal in North America to humans,” according to the report. ”
Okay, enough of this nonsense. This is the problem, liberals, you’re so bent on “Green” alternatives and Wildlife Protection, that you’re actually fucking considering re-introducing a large predator animal into fairly population-dense areas, in hope that they’ll leave cattle, dogs, other cats, horses, small children, and property alone, and solely focus on deer…….Riiiiiiiight.
According to the article “The study asserts that a single cougar may kill 259 deer over a six-year lifespan.” Well gee, with an “exploding population” they’re not exactly in competition for food. With no natural predators, and taking into account many themselves will be struck by cars, we can safely assume that they’ll live past six years. Using their math, which averaged to a staggering 43-44 deer per year, if it added only three more years to the Cougar’s life, the kill rate would average around 390 in a lifetime. Using numbers of my state of NC, conservative estimates putting our whitetail deer population at around 1.2 Million, meaning that the benefit of adding one Cougar to our area would only amount to .00032% of the total population culled. If you had TEN Cougars, you would only be fixing the problem by .0032%.
Conversely, consider the danger you’re bringing to your area with only Cougar for that .00032%. Cougars can’t be programmed to ONLY target deer. They can’t be trained, and certainly can’t be punished if the break the rules and target something else. For .00032%, you’re willing to endanger a population to achieve minuscule Return On Investment for the sake of saying that its a “natural predator” and more “humane?!”
Seriously, cut the shit. You’re stupidity is going to get people hurt.
“Oh, yeah, well do you have a better idea?” the now enlightened liberal asks. Why yes, mother fucker, yes I do. Its called back the PETA the fuck off my nuts, and get federal, state, and local governments to loosen the hunting restrictions around these areas. People, unlike a damn mountain lion, can be trained, and only target deer. They can be held to account and punished if they accidentally target something other than what they are intending to.
Now before libtards lose whats left of their minds, contrary to what you may think, there are other ways to kill a deer than just using a high powered rifle with a scope. I too, would think that there could be some danger inherent with using a high powered hunting rifle with scope in an urban to suburban area. A .270 Remington round is too fast and will pierce through the animal faster than some even know they are hit. Depending on the angle of trajectory, this could pose a risk. A .30-06 would also punch through and a miss could be fatal. Not to mention the inherent noise in those areas due to the govt putting ridiculous restrictions on suppressors. My answer would be allow bowhunting, crossbow, shotgun, muzzleloader, and possibly handgun. (certain calibers only, ensuring an ethical kill, don’t shoot a fucking deer with a 9mm or .380 you idiot. I’m thinking larger caliber with hot charge)
These options are certainly ethical, much safer, and allow for precise targeting of the issue with great results. The average hunter can usually take 3-4 in a season depending on state. Extend that, if your state has a lot of deer, and lengthen hunting season. Relax rules on hunting, even for a short amount of time (1 season or 2) and we’ll easily see the drop in numbers to something a little better balanced. Each of those weapons doesnt have an effective lethal range of more than 125 yrds. Most of them have an effective range of less than 75. Most deer taken in hunting are killed within 150 yds of the shooter even with a high powered rifle.
Bottom line: Every hunter knows that there are two enemies to finding deer in your area; 1) “growth” and development in the form of construction, which pushes them out of their natural habitat and forces them to migrate, and 2) pressure from a predator-rich environment. Arguably 2 has a bigger impact than 1. To our northern state friends, if you have a problem with deer causing that much damage, extend your seasons, loosen your rules, research different weapons and their capabilities to allow into your state for game, and put out the word far and wide. Then sit back and wait. Rednecks far and wide will hear the call and take care of your problem. But I strongly urge you not to consider releasing uncontrollable wild predators loose in your communities. That is more irresponsible than people hunting while drunk.