Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="wct12" data-source="post: 439067" data-attributes="member: 8117">Habitat loss is a huge portion of this yes, but the department has a very, VERY minimal chance of getting that back to the way it was so why do they keep beating a dead horse instead of trying to be proactive instead of reactive like I said .But to say things like supplemental feeding doesn’t do a whole lot to animal health.. in the livestock industry I adjust rations to help my cows through the winter. I don’t let them forage off grass quality hay and pick through standing corn stubble. They are supplementally fed something to not lose fat and body condition. Imagine if deer didn’t have to burn through those fat reserves early in the winter, or the toughest parts of it. The deer herds we supplementally feed in the winter almost always seem to have a higher survival rating then the ones that we can’t just do to distance from us (we roll a bale or 2 out with a pickup when we can or other sportsmen come get feed from us to do it but not near the quantity). Why not try and help?Last  year how many deer died due to the harsh winter? How many more deer does even 5-10% of that not dying or aborting fawns put back? Imagine if 60% of that 5-10% were does and had fawns this spring. Those are opportunities given back to sportsmen by the department being proactive instead of reactive and writing an article saying “we watched all these deer die due to conditions and starvation. By the way we reduced tags by another 5-10k. Sorry.”Although we already dump thousands of dollars into habitat and feed almost every year, I would have 0 problem hitting that “round up or donate $5 to supplemental feed” when purchasing licenses.</blockquote>

Verification: What is the most common fish caught on this site?

Reply to thread

Recent Posts

Friends of NDA