Ruger Forum banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,554 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
7 hours ago • SPECIAL TO THE POST-DISPATCH

5




TOWN AND COUNTRY • Town and Country will continue its sharpshooting only policy for deer management over the coming winter, aldermen voted Monday night.

The city will pay White Buffalo, a Connecticut-based wildlife management firm, up to $57,000 with a goal "to euthanize up to 125 unmarked deer," under the ordinance which was approved 8-0.

The only board comment during the meeting was from Alderman Fred Meyland-Smith, who said he "absolutely votes yes."

Resident Barbara Ann Hughes was the only public speaker. "The board is being addicted to annual killing which is not effective, and a waste of money," she said.

She was accompanied by four other residents including Mariette Palmer, who said her group is also concerned with animal rights.

But Meyland-Smith said after the meeting that sharpshooting is effective, humane and efficient.

In 2009-10 the city's deer management effort resulted in 112 deer shot and 100 sterilized. In 2010-11 year the numbers were reduced to 70 and 30, as part of the program relied on cash contributions from residents.

But in 2011-12 the city paid the cost and almost 300 deer were shot.

The program is working and there is less need
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,868 Posts
How many local hunters would participate gratis and donate the meat to local food banks? My math says it is costing tax payers $456 per deer IF the limit of 125 is achieved. Guess you guys are in a much better fiscal situation than most of us.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
130 Posts
I am in St. Louis as well... Like anywhere we have a bunch of people just scared of guns or bows. So paying these sharpshooters is supposed to allay fears on stray bullets.

I live near a bunch of deer, and I wouldn't want anybody shooting deer within 3 miles of my house, and I am a gun enthusiast. It's the old not in my backyard, and it is a concern.

But I wouldn't trust these Rambo "exporters" much more than a typical hunter either...

Bow hunting is better near homes (though still can be dangerous of course).
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
23,032 Posts
To me that is a misuse of the towns money. If they set up a lottery system for bow hunters they could make money on it and the meat wouldn't spoil. Have each hunter pay $20 for a chance at 5 either sex tags and let them hunt. At win win.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,768 Posts
Its not about what's safe and what's not. It is pure antigun, anti-hunting. If it wasn't then why do we see instances like these on offshore islands such as San Clemente, San Rosa islands with no houses or human population on them at all? In the case of Santa Rosa the deer and elk out there that the parks service had eradicated were from a trophy gene pool that put most of California's usual deer and elk populations to shame in terms of body size and antler growth and you would have had hunters paying good amounts of money to pursue these animals. However the parks service felt it was better to pay some "contractor" hundreds of thousands of dollars (if not millions) to shoot these animals from helicopters and leave them to rot. Oh, and BTW, PETA and HSUS were conspicuously absent when all this was going on...go figure.

Slaughter on the Island: Hijacking the Flag of Conservation - NRAHuntersrights.org, NRA
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
23,032 Posts
redhawker:

I remember that happening. Imagine if they had taken pics of the "trophy" elk and then auctioned off the first 10 tags. I bet you would raise thousands on just those tags. Hold a hunt for them then open it up at $300 a tag for the rest of us. They would have saved a tremendous amount and the meat would not be wasted.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top