At a local city park, they are "thinning" the deer herd, which has reached approximately 700 deer over 1,236 acres, or a population density roughly 2 acres/deer. This equals about 86,000 square feet per deer. They are doing this because they feel that a density of deer that high cannot be sustained by the park ecosystem.The human population density in Lenexa, KS, the town in which the aforementioned park exists, has a population density of 1,266 people per square mile, or roughly 22,000 square feet per person. This is four times denser than the troublesome deer population.
The human population density in New York, New York is about 27,440 people per square mile. This equals about 1,015 square feet per person, or roughly 85 times denser than the local park deer population.
But it is the deer that have thrown the park ecosystem out of balance, and unless thinned are in danger of causing their own demise. And global warming is a myth.
_
3 comments:
I ran across some of the lovely protesters in said park a couple days ago.
I politely told them they were fighting for the wrong thing. What they need to do is fight for the re-population of natural predators that consume deer into the park (wolves, bobcats, Saber Tooth Tigers, ect.)
They scoffed at my idea (mostly because it could make the park unsafe), but in the absence of something naturally thinning their population, the humane choice is to thin out their population for them.
Humans living in close proximity doesn't cause us (humans) to starve like the deer in the park.
The deer in that park look sickly.
I just love how sarcastic the followers of the religion of man made global warming are getting over this story. A few of your own cult leaders like George Monbiot admit that the science now needs “reanalyising” and that CRU Director Phil Jones should resign.
He states: “It’s no use pretending that this isn’t a major blow. The emails extracted by a hacker from the climatic research unit at the University of East Anglia could scarcely be more damaging. I am now convinced that they are genuine, and I’m dismayed and deeply shaken by them,” writes Monbiot.
“Yes, the messages were obtained illegally. Yes, all of us say things in emails that would be excruciating if made public. Yes, some of the comments have been taken out of context. But there are some messages that require no spin to make them look bad. There appears to be evidence here of attempts to prevent scientific data from being released, and even to destroy material that was subject to a freedom of information request.”
“Worse still, some of the emails suggest efforts to prevent the publication of work by climate sceptics, or to keep it out of a report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. I believe that the head of the unit, Phil Jones, should now resign. Some of the data discussed in the emails should be re-analysed.”
I could go on and on with quotes from the man made global warming camp coming out and admitting how this is a blow for them and that we do not truly understand all of the factors that create the earths climate. I could list the e-mails that clearly show the data manipulation in order to hide temp decrease from the general public. But why, this issue has become so much like a religion that its followers opperate on blind faith. There is nothing you can do to have them look at it from a different perspective let alone change their minds.
Instead you point to a wiki page edited by the "scientists" at the CRU (the same ones being called out) that even twists a bit of the words from Monbiot (I gave you the real quote above) as your info to the story being much about nothing. Fantastic!
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_Unit_emails%2C_data%2C_models%2C_1996-2009
Josh,
While I understand what you are saying, two thoughts: humans living in close proximity doesn't make us starve like deer...but in the absence of agricultural input, we would. In the case of deer, once the local resources are consumed, they move to the nearby neighborhoods and eat people's flowerbeds, which is where the problem originally began.
Second, you argue that the deer look sickly in the park...and I respond that a during a trip to Chicago a couple years ago I had to work hard to find a single healthy person. You don't think their is a direct relationship between America's urbanization and America's growing level of obesity and obesity-related disease?
Post a Comment