Jump to content
Wise choice, you tested the rock with both feet, fell in and got all wet. Now lets proceed by testing the next rock with one foot before commiting.
Why didn't they just do this in the first place?
Thank you for that update.
Interesting they would claim a "safety issue" as the reason for the slaughter idea, one would think if a human were killed or injured by one, it would then be a safety issue. I was not aware that canine assault or botany battery were safety issues.
To bad they silenced the audience, might have been due to the passion surrounding this issue.
Hopefully a workable solution will be suggested that will satisfy all residents.
Anyone know how the City council meeting went tonight?
That is a pretty good read xrsareus, even though it is 16 years old.
Still makes a lot of sense and I encourage every single reader, poster and person for/against the DOW/City plan to read it...just substitute the town names for "Craig, Maybell, Hayden" or whatever town name fits this region.
Thanks for that, good stuff.
Plus als362, those eastern states have a very high prevalence of Lyme disease which is what prompts them to take action.
See this map for Lyme disease prevalence in the U.S.:
Also, their urban deer populations in some areas of those eastern states are in the thousands while we are dealing with MAYBE 400-500 here.
I searched things like "urban deer management" and "urban deer control". Not once did I run across a set plan such as Craig's idea to exterminate large groups of them...they consisted of well thought out management plans to control the population, which I can agree with.
Control being the keyword here. Mass trapping/killing is not control, it is a knee-jerk reaction to a minority of the towns population.
Craig is stepping on the rock in deep water with both feet instead of testing it with one.
51 letters & e-mails against the "plan"
187 petition signatures against the "plan"
70+ e-mails from PETA members against the "plan"(or at least the cruelty of bow-hunting)
351 Daily Press Readers opposed to the "plan"
=659 of those against mass trapping, slaughter and execution of the NATIVE deer.
50 people who attended the first meeting and demanded this "plan".
17 letters/e-mails in favor of the "plan".
144 for the plan on the reader poll
1 mayor and 3-4 councilpersons in favor of it(I'm guessing, we haven't heard much from them)
=215 people who want to exterminate the NATIVE deer.
If it were an election and we voted on this nonsense, the DOW/City plan, not the deer, would be exterminated.
The ONLY sensible plan, as suggested by another poster, is to make those that want the deer removed pay for it themselves.
Hopefully city council will see that the majority has spoken and will rule against this plan and come up with something reasonable other than outright extermination.
I don't think we are against control, but we are against outright mass trapping/killing and neighborhood bow-hunting. Safety first and that method is not safe for an urban area.
My suggestion is for those on the council to do some Google searching and studying of what other towns have done before making a firm decision.
Dawgs sink the sailors boat, 42-8.
Finally after 6 years.
Excellent game....way to go guys.
Be sure to attend, this is bound to be one of the best games this season.
"I did not know Deer were conscious of the concept of family life."
I have this gut feeling that no matter what the citizens say, the City is going to go ahead with the plan suggested by DOW. I don't belive for one minute they want to come up with a reasonable plan, they just want to exterminate now and get it over with. Thankfully there is at least one Councilwoman who seems to have the right idea and deal with them on a case-by-case basis. Otherwise, from the rest of them, those against the proposed plan, and apparently PETA, are being given the ol' one fingered salute.
I can agree on a certain degree of thinning the deer population as long as it is done in the right manner, not by shooting arrows at them or by trapping them. If sharpshooters are to be used then there MUST be very strict rules that need to be followed.
If they are sick, they need to go. If they TRULY have injured someone, they need to go(staring down not counted). I feel that there has been some pretty tall tales told in some of the letters submitted lately, anything to get rid of them right? If it is done humanely, fine. No mass killing. Stay out of my yard, your bullets and arrows are not welcome here. Property owners must give permission to allow the hunt on their property. The fines need to be much larger for feeding them. I could go on for awhile but I think my point has been made.
I truly hope their plan fails miserably and the wildlife continues to find the city as their home.
Get out your pots & pans.............
"And DavidMoore, do you really want to invite the likes of PETA into Craig?"
No, not really.
I did look at their website and there is a pretty easy way to contact them and get them involved...if they would even consider it. Seeing how other towns have reasonable(note: "reasonable") management plans utilizing various tactics I thought they might be interested in the "kill, kill again and kill some more" method proposed by the City and DOW. I am not a PETA member and I generally do not approve of how they conduct themselves nor do I believe believe in their master plan, they are however pretty good at getting people to stop abusing and killing unreasonably.
Please read my post above this one, after some research I have a different outlook, I have not however changed the way I feel about this plan.
Last login: Thursday, October 13, 2016
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2016 Craig Daily Press. All rights reserved.