hunting in Mass. (Amherst: sale, homes, transfer)

[doghead]

I've been reading the posts on the Vermont site and a lot of people mention hunting, and seeing deer strapped to cars in front of convenience stores.
Are any areas in MA like that? Specifically, Amherst/Northamton, or the Cape? I know there is hunting allowed (or there used to be) at the National Seashore. Is this a prevalent site in parts of MA? I'd like to move to MA but don't want an area where hunting is so commonplace. Thanks.

[capecodcathy]

Hunting is allowed in Mass. but it's very strictly regulated (as it probably is in Vermont). I can't speak about the western part of the state, but the deer hunting season is late Nov. to early Dec at Camp Edwards. I live right near there and have never seen a deer strapped to a car and rarely even see the hunters.
Anywhere you have large wooded areas, you will probably find hunting, especially deer hunting. Otherwise the population would explode and you'd see more of them dead on the highway. I'm not a big fan of hunting but understand the necessity of it.

[scarletfire]

Cathy are you actually claiming that hunting is a necessity?

[miu]

So what's the problem with hunting deer? I don't hunt any animals, however the deer population does need to be thinned out annually. If there wasn't deer hunting out all, their population would get even more out of control. And it's not a matter of them staying in the forests, but they wreak havoc on the farmers cornfields plus worst yet is the danger of encountering them on the roads at night. I am a really careful driver, but car and deer collisions are a real hazard and difficult to prevent. A few years back, I almost hit a deer on the NJ Turnpike one night around 10pm. Anyway, if you move to MA or any of the surrounding states, you will much more likely see dead deer on the side of the road all year round than deer strapped on hunters' cars. Plus those teeny deer ticks spread Lymes Disease.

[scarletfire]

The HUMAN population is exploding too. But of course, any species that in any way seems to interfere with our little lives must be "thinned out"? Oh dear, it's such an inconvenience for us in our cars to have to swerve to avoid animals. Let's just build WalMarts everywhere and to h*ll with the other animals.

[Sophana]

OMG. Hunting. I'm not a fan of hunting any animal or bird. You might want to stay away from Plum Island. The last time I was there a beautiful pheasant walked right across my path.

I had to purchase a pass from the Park Ranger, and he told me I could only go as far as the large sign, which was filled with pictures of animals that live on Plum Island and descriptions of their habitat needs. I remember reading that lynx lived there.

When I turned around two guys dressed in camouflage outfits with bows and arrows and grease on their faces were standing there. The Ranger had not told me hunting was allowed.

Plum Island is one of the most beautiful places in Massachusetts, and is very famous for bird watching, which is why I was there. Thousands of people go there every year just to view the local and migratory birds.

Unless they've changed the rules hunting is allowed there at certain times of the year, but I don't understand why. I'm so tired of hearing that animal populations must be thinned.

What kind of a person would find pleasure in shooting a pheasant with a bow and arrow anyway?

[miu]

Originally Posted by scarletfire

The HUMAN population is exploding too. But of course, any species that in any way seems to interfere with our little lives must be "thinned out"? Oh dear, it's such an inconvenience for us in our cars to have to swerve to avoid animals. Let's just build WalMarts everywhere and to h*ll with the other animals.

I'm not pro-Walmart either and I agree that there are too many humans on the planet. My boyfriend and I will never have children. I've only killed one animal with my car in all my 30 years of driving, and I drive a lot and take many cross country roadtrips for work. It was a raccoon on the Garden State Parkway around 3am in the morning. And I've saved a number of turtles from being road kill. My only issue with hunting is that it be a clean kill and the animal die immediately. Otherwise, I am an omnivore and will always enjoy eating meat. If a hunter makes a clean kill and eats it, I really don't see what the problem is. Mother Nature is all about the endless cycle of life and death and the food chain. You sound like a vegan, but consider that you wouldn't be here on this planet if your ancestors had only eaten plants. Carnivorous and omnivorous life forms have the aggressive personality needed to survive. Herbivores tend to be around just to be eaten by the other two groups.

I found these 2005 road kill statistics on the web.
High Country News -- February 7, 2005: Roadkill statistics

253,000
Number of animal-vehicle accidents annually
50
Estimated percentage of vehicle-large animal collisions that go unreported.
90
Percentage of animal-vehicle collisions that involve deer
$2,000
Average minimum cost for repairing a vehicle after a collision with a deer
1 million
Number of vertebrates run over each day in the United States (a rate of one every 11.5 seconds).
200
Number of human deaths annually resulting from vehicle-wildlife collisions.

Again, my comment to the original poster stands, that it's much more likely that they will view roadkilled deer that see deer tied to a car and being brought home by a hunter.

[sambo42xa]

...oh boy, here we go..................Activist time....................

[CaseyB]

Some municipalities have experimented with a birth control vacine that can be shot into the doe before mating season. I don't know if it has ever been tried here, or what the costs would be.

[doghead]

Many animals suffer prolonged, painful deaths when they are injured but not killed by hunters. A member of the Maine Bowhunters Alliance estimates that 50 percent of animals who are shot with crossbows are wounded but not killed. A study of 80 radio-collared white-tailed deer found that of the 22 deer who had been shot with “traditional archery equipment,” 11 were wounded but not recovered by hunters. Twenty percent of foxes who have been wounded by hunters are shot again; 10 percent manage to escape, but “starvation is a likely fate” for them, according to one veterinarian. A South Dakota Department of Game, Fish, and Parks biologist estimates that more than 3 million wounded ducks go “unretrieved” every year. A British study of deer hunting found that 11 percent of deer who’d been killed by hunters died only after being shot two or more times and that some wounded deer suffered for more than 15 minutes before dying.
Hunting disrupts migration and hibernation patterns and destroys families. For animals like wolves, who mate for life and live in close-knit family units, hunting can devastate entire communities. The stress that hunted animals suffer—caused by fear and the inescapable loud noises and other commotion that hunters create—also severely compromises their normal eating habits, making it hard for them to store the fat and energy that they need in order to survive the winter.
Blood-Thirsty and Profit-Driven
To attract more hunters (and their money), federal and state agencies implement programs—often called “wildlife management” or “conservation” programs—that are designed to boost the number of “game” species. These programs help to ensure that there are plenty of animals for hunters to kill and, consequently, plenty of revenue from the sale of hunting licenses.
Duck hunters in Louisiana persuaded the state wildlife agency to direct $100,000 a year toward “reduced predator impact,” which involved trapping foxes and raccoons so that more duck eggs would hatch, giving hunters more birds to kill. The Ohio Division of Wildlife teamed up with a hunter-organized society to push for clear-cutting (i.e., decimating large tracts of trees) in Wayne National Forest in order to “produce habitat needed by ruffed grouse.”
In Alaska, the Department of Fish and Game is trying to increase the number of moose for hunters by “controlling” the wolf and bear populations. Grizzlies and black bears have been moved hundreds of miles away from their homes; two were shot by hunters within two weeks of their relocation, and others have simply returned to their homes.(14) Wolves have been slaughtered in order to “let the moose population rebound and provide a higher harvest for local hunters.”(15) In the early 1990s, a program designed to reduce the wolf population backfired when snares failed to kill victims quickly and photos of suffering wolves were seen by an outraged public.
Nature Takes Care of Its Own
The delicate balance of ecosystems ensures their own survival—if they are left unaltered. Natural predators help maintain this balance by killing only the sickest and weakest individuals. Hunters, however, kill any animal whom they would like to hang over the fireplace—including large, healthy animals who are needed to keep the population strong. Elephant poaching is believed to have increased the number of tuskless animals in Africa, and in Canada, hunting has caused bighorn sheep’s horn size to fall by 25 percent in the last 40 years; Nature magazine reports that “the effect on the populations’ genetics is probably deeper.”
Even when unusual natural occurrences cause overpopulation, natural processes work to stabilize the group. Starvation and disease can be tragic, but they are nature’s ways of ensuring that healthy, strong animals survive and maintain the strength level of the rest of their herd or group. Shooting an animal because he or she might starve or become sick is arbitrary and destructive.
“Sport” hunting not only jeopardizes nature’s balance, it also exacerbates other problems. For example, the transfer of captive-bred deer and elk between states for the purpose of hunting is believed to have contributed to the epidemic spread of chronic wasting disease (CWD). As a result, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has given state wildlife agencies millions of dollars to “manage” deer and elk populations.(18) The fatal neurological illness that affects these animals has been likened to mad cow disease, and while the USDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention claim that CWD has no relationship to any similar diseases that affect humans or farmed animals, the slaughter of deer and elk continues.