Too many deer urine hurting ecology

[Elmo]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/deers-bathroom-breaks-bad-trees-study-article-1.1365033

 

[pewlodar]

The only solution I see is to shoot more deer; Road Trip!

[Arrow Flinger]

My dogs doing the same damn thing to my yard, killing all my grass!

[jesse.james]

My dogs doing the same damn thing to my yard, killing all my grass!

mine also

[Paula]

our lawn has deed spots where the one dog pisses the most, he is on medication

[Doc]

Here is another one of those "studies" that I think is completely over-exaggerated. Yes, if an animal urinates directly on a plant, maybe it will die ..... maybe. But, let's get real. How much actual coverage does deer urine actually achieve. Just how significant is the result? I guess I just have a naturally suspicious mind, but I hate to see everyone get all excited just because somebody assigns the word "study" to some of these things. Most likely they penned up some deer and found that most of the vegetation in the pen disappeared. But then, nature's deer herd doesn't live in a pen do they? It appears that some of these researchers have to come up with some kind of outrageous findings in order to get their allotment of grant money for the following year. This is likely another case of don't believe everything that the "experts" and "researchers" are peddling. I think there is plenty of reason to suspect this "study".

[landtracdeerhunter]

I believe that some of these paid researcher, need to get out in nature more often and observe.

[fasteddie]

If you could only train the deer , you wouldn't need to use Round-Up !

[mike rossi]

Here is another one of those "studies" that I think is completely over-exaggerated. Yes, if an animal urinates directly on a plant, maybe it will die ..... maybe. But, let's get real. How much actual coverage does deer urine actually achieve. Just how significant is the result? I guess I just have a naturally suspicious mind, but I hate to see everyone get all excited just because somebody assigns the word "study" to some of these things. Most likely they penned up some deer and found that most of the vegetation in the pen disappeared. But then, nature's deer herd doesn't live in a pen do they? It appears that some of these researchers have to come up with some kind of outrageous findings in order to get their allotment of grant money for the following year. This is likely another case of don't believe everything that the "experts" and "researchers" are peddling. I think there is plenty of reason to suspect this "study".

No the other way around. They excluded deer from reference areas and compared the plant communities. The areas were deer foraged naturally were degraded, the areas deer did not have access to were not.

 

LOL - did you realize this was even mentioned during the crossbow town hall meeting? This is what Senator Grisanti was referring to when he asked about the impact of deer on birds . Watch it again - its like Ragu- "it in there".

 

Doc, you have a habit of raising questions about variables. It is the researchers who are thee experts in determining what the co-variates are, that's what they do. Scientists have suspicious minds too...

[Doc]

Doc, you have a habit of raising questions about variables. It is the researchers who are thee experts in determining what the co-variates are, that's what they do. Scientists have suspicious minds too...

I guess I just get tired of watching people go all ga-ga over every article that comes out with some astounding claim. It seems that the mere mention of a "study" makes people automatically assume validity and god-like truth. And then every so often a study like this one comes along that is so completely difficult to swallow as to put a real strain of the credibility. I do not afford researchers a quality of infallibility and I do believe the term "expert" gets assigned all too easily. I do not worship them as being some kind of keepers of the truth. And I think there is plenty of reason to doubt and question their findings and even occasionally their motives. And guess what .... Even their own colleagues often question those same things and on many occasions reverse the findings. So at times I set my gullibility aside and do question those studies that seem to be particularly weird to me. That's probably something we all should occasionally do.

[apoallo]

not if we can only use this to shove in the tree huggers faces then maybe they will leave us alone when we are in the woods....

[apoallo]

I have one spot of mine that is overrun with deer its a 10 acre lot surrounded by houses ion the pperimeter. everytime I go there I get harassed by someone.

[Four Season Whitetail's]

I guess I just get tired of watching people go all ga-ga over every article that comes out with some astounding claim. It seems that the mere mention of a "study" makes people automatically assume validity and god-like truth. And then every so often a study like this one comes along that is so completely difficult to swallow as to put a real strain of the credibility. I do not afford researchers a quality of infallibility and I do believe the term "expert" gets assigned all too easily. I do not worship them as being some kind of keepers of the truth. And I think there is plenty of reason to doubt and question their findings and even occasionally their motives. And guess what .... Even their own colleagues often question those same things and on many occasions reverse the findings. So at times I set my gullibility aside and do question those studies that seem to be particularly weird to me. That's probably something we all should occasionally do.

 

You must mean this as kinda like the cwd scare to get testing money.  Years ago cwd was going to wipe out every deer on earth, Now they dont even give funds for testing. Go Figure!

 If deer piss killed all that grows in pens then i would be replanting evey year. Just does not happen!

[NFA-ADK]

Well plain and simple I bet if you put 100 of any(Big game) animals in a 1 mile area they will cause havoc on the plants...  Simple math those area's with that many deer need to be culled...  The land can only hold so many deer, 100 per square mile WOW what a difference from the ADK...  I think we can all agree that any study with that many big game animals in that small of an area will have issues.  I understand this is a wintering area but I am sure that area recovers after the spring thaw and rains, they have for years, that is why the deer keep coming back...

 

I wonder if this was a year round study. 

"They hope to use the findings to help identify strategies that would help strike the right balance for the ecosystem."  Saplings will grow, life finds a way plain and simple, mother nature does not need our help in getting hemlocks to grow.  Sounds like a tree hugger to me... 

 

Will deer yards suffer when all those deer are present, yes.  But every year they recover and the deer return...  Sounds like a useless study to me, JMO...

[Paula]

I have one spot of mine that is overrun with deer its a 10 acre lot surrounded by houses ion the pperimeter. everytime I go there I get harassed by someone.

 

mail them the article

[mike rossi]

Funny, the tree huggers seem to be calling for knocking the deer way down and maintaining lower deer populations. I know that wont sit well with the crowd who thinks deer numbers are low, but the other camp of hunters is always touting population control.

 

One of you miscategorizes the study design and another one of you misses the point about the wrong kind of saplings replacing the hemlock. As the women say - "whatever"...

[Ford]

I do know one thing, If you piss on a piece of moss for four days in a row, it will die. (and a dandelion)

[Elmo]

I do know one thing, If you piss on a piece of moss for four days in a row, it will die. (and a dandelion)

That's what I told the police officer but he still gave me a ticket for urinating in public.