"Are Crops Contributing To The Whitetail Decline?"
- Thread starter Big_Holla
- Start date
I would have to agree it is still a result of multiple factors our herd is declining. Is this one of them? Sure seems like a possible cause. I don't think the coyotes are helping, but I don't think they should be blamed for more than a small percent of it. In my unscientifically based "opinion" I would think 10-20% is all the coyotes are taking out. I think I am being generous at that. It is probably lower. Increased harvest is the biggest reason in my opinion. The GMOs and RR seeds might be one reason in the reduced birthing rates. Time will tell, but we still might not know in our lifetime. Probably will NOT know with a definitive answer in our lifetime.
Ohiosam
*Supporting Member*
GMOs and roundup are the best thing that has ever happened in agriculture as far as the environment is concerned. They have allowed no till and minimum till acres to dramatically increase. That has dramatically decreased erosion and non-point source polution. It has also lowered the amount of pesticides farmers use while increasing effectiveness. Yields have gone up too.
Urbanhunter
Junior Member
There is truth in much here. On both sides.... Post 18 hits the mark and is spot on... Ohiosam has a bit of truth also.. They do use a bit less in Pesticides, there is a bit less erosion and yields have gone up. As for non-point source pollution I don't but that.. That would be more towards Mid to large factorys unless the farmer is just dumping gallons of polluted material. When they us to till it absorbed what ever product that was sprayed now with no till, it runs off like water being poured over a piece of paper. Down side to tilling is soil run off.. The old large buffers would help that problem.... Just not solve it completely.
On the other hand. Not having buffer's along water way's like in the past has caused algae blooms and erosion is still fairly high along with Pesticides in the water way's.. Due to to the farmers mentality of "lets farm every inch." The same mentality that has doomed the quail and pheasant..
The GMO's are not bad it is the active ingredient in roundup that is being absorbed into the plants that causes the problem residual. Glyphosate..... Some say its harmless others say it is harmful.. What I have found is that it is the latter... Farmers will tell you it's not but they are harvesting record crops the Gov./Monsantos owns the world food trade so they are not going to tell you it bad for you.. Will we ever know the truth? yea in another 30 years but if it's bad then it will be to late or they will have another excuse for the increase in liver, kidney, or cancer.. How ever you look at it. We are F-ed and the water ways are f-ed.. The man with all the money usually prevails.. If you are ever going to invest your money.. Put it in food..... It is said that by 2050 the world will not be able to feed it's self.. I don't believe that, but I feel the quality of food will drastically go down.. Look at the GMO chickens and the acres of buildings of caged birds that never walk around. They get pumped full of antibiotics to keep the healthy and steroids to grow them bigger.. And we wonder why we have bigger and fatter kids.. G... As the saying goes we are what we eat.... The quality of food has gone down already... No, I'm not a "tree hugger" just calling it how I see it..
On the deer side.. If the soy beans are absorbing Glyphosate and they are feeding on it for a summer It's possible that it is effecting thing's.. Matbe it will be the deer biologist that find out that Glyphosate is bad.. Who knows.
That's my two cent's
On the other hand. Not having buffer's along water way's like in the past has caused algae blooms and erosion is still fairly high along with Pesticides in the water way's.. Due to to the farmers mentality of "lets farm every inch." The same mentality that has doomed the quail and pheasant..
The GMO's are not bad it is the active ingredient in roundup that is being absorbed into the plants that causes the problem residual. Glyphosate..... Some say its harmless others say it is harmful.. What I have found is that it is the latter... Farmers will tell you it's not but they are harvesting record crops the Gov./Monsantos owns the world food trade so they are not going to tell you it bad for you.. Will we ever know the truth? yea in another 30 years but if it's bad then it will be to late or they will have another excuse for the increase in liver, kidney, or cancer.. How ever you look at it. We are F-ed and the water ways are f-ed.. The man with all the money usually prevails.. If you are ever going to invest your money.. Put it in food..... It is said that by 2050 the world will not be able to feed it's self.. I don't believe that, but I feel the quality of food will drastically go down.. Look at the GMO chickens and the acres of buildings of caged birds that never walk around. They get pumped full of antibiotics to keep the healthy and steroids to grow them bigger.. And we wonder why we have bigger and fatter kids.. G... As the saying goes we are what we eat.... The quality of food has gone down already... No, I'm not a "tree hugger" just calling it how I see it..
On the deer side.. If the soy beans are absorbing Glyphosate and they are feeding on it for a summer It's possible that it is effecting thing's.. Matbe it will be the deer biologist that find out that Glyphosate is bad.. Who knows.
That's my two cent's
Last edited:
- 25,126
- 261
I disagree, regarding coyotes. They are very good at what they do, and what they do is find stuff to eat, and that includes deer. Groundhogs used to be a Sunday afternoon hobby for many around here. My neighbor used to try to kill 100 a year off his farm. He never made it, but did get well into the 90's several years. You couldn't find a groundhog on his farm now if you spent the entire summer looking. Mason had never SEEN a groundhog until last summer. At 10 years of age he had to ask what it was, and you know how much time he spends in the outdoors! Do we suspect the lack of the formerly abundant groundhogs to be the fault of GMOs? I suppose its possible, but I'm more willing to bet it has more to do with the explosion of coyotes. I suspect the same regarding the lack of fawns. Jesse and Joe saw plenty of BEC pics several years ago from cameras we had scattered in Fayette Co. There were coyotes, lots and lots of coyotes, (I saw 10 in one morning's hunt), and 3 adult does for every single fawn. In years passed, those 3 adult does would have had 6-8 fawns in tow vs. 1. It is possible they were simply never born, but I tend to think it's more likely they just didn't survive for very long, due to coyotes.
I'm on board with over harvesting,high yote population and diseases being the 3 biggest and main reasons for our deer numbers being down. Statewide I believe the number of dead deer due to EHD AND Blue Tongue over the past 10 years would be staggering. What's frustrating over the past 10 years is the DOW knowing the large amounts of dead deer being found didn't pull back on the number of tags being allowed per hunter.
I also believe the explosion in popularity in both hunting with compound bows and xbows over the last decade or two has much more pressure on the deer herd as well! Technology has perpetuated those two weapons into very fast,accurate and quiet deer killing hardware.
Even though there might be some merit in what Chuck brings up in his OP I think the few factors I mentioned above have much more to do with low deer numbers than that. Just my opinion...
I also believe the explosion in popularity in both hunting with compound bows and xbows over the last decade or two has much more pressure on the deer herd as well! Technology has perpetuated those two weapons into very fast,accurate and quiet deer killing hardware.
Even though there might be some merit in what Chuck brings up in his OP I think the few factors I mentioned above have much more to do with low deer numbers than that. Just my opinion...
Urbanhunter
Junior Member
Finnlyshedded, I agree on the first 3, But I want to add onto the list.. and GMO and round up IMO isn't on the top 5..
The amount of wounded deer from bow hunters would be 4 on the list. (& I'm a bow hunter) With 5 being a bump in poaching due to the new check in system and bump in un-ethical hunters which I contribute it from a lack of tradition and role models. A lot of new hunters aren't "born into traditional hunting family." Some may disagree with me. I just know quite a few newer hunters that didn't start out hunting with G-pa or Dad. I feel it contribute a bit. Some are not the most ethical but I am just going by some stories they tell. The stories also contribute to reason # 4..
The amount of wounded deer from bow hunters would be 4 on the list. (& I'm a bow hunter) With 5 being a bump in poaching due to the new check in system and bump in un-ethical hunters which I contribute it from a lack of tradition and role models. A lot of new hunters aren't "born into traditional hunting family." Some may disagree with me. I just know quite a few newer hunters that didn't start out hunting with G-pa or Dad. I feel it contribute a bit. Some are not the most ethical but I am just going by some stories they tell. The stories also contribute to reason # 4..
Last edited:
yotehunter
Member
I couldn't have said it better. I do know their are studies being done on the muskrat population in respects to water quality and I don't care what you say that round up is going somewhere. And thats in the ground. I sprayed thousand of acres of that stuff when I worked at a large fertilizer plant. Sure it is a lot safer then the attrazine based products that we used to spray. But the difference is we are using round up in almost every acre year after year after year, now its getting big in the seed corn since the patent was opened up. So I'm not sure there is not some truth to the study. Too much of a good thing can come back and hurt yea.
I do agree with everything in your last paragraph but I was including this into the over harvesting which I feel is number one. Over harvesting IMO, also includes kill permits and poaching along with the deer not recovered no matter the weapon or intent. I feel just because the deer didn't make it to the plate or wall it still should be counted and I feel the DOW doesn't count them like they should.
Last edited:
Agriculture = $$ Yes, the best thing that has happened for the people involved.
Environment = I can't see how increased chemical use of Round-Up and other chemicals is any better than using other pesticides. You are just trading one for the other. The reduction of fence rows and buffer zones has also taken place simply because they can now run chemicals over it, plant it and see what comes up.
- 39,067
- 274
Hahaha. OSU wins one title game in 13 years after having to change the rules to do it. Lmao.
Now, now. All I'm saying is a farmer sticking up for GMO crops is like a homer SEC fan creaming "Roll Tide". lmao
- 39,067
- 274
I can see in theory what Sam is saying. Weed seeds can lay dormant for decades. With reduced tilling/plowing, they stay deep in the soil and are not on the surface ready to germinate. Technology has helped the plants grow quickly to shade out weeds. These factors DO reduce the amount of RoundUp needed. Do the farmers decrease the amount applied? Like anything, it depends on the education of farmer applying the chemical. I have seen lawn guys spray light and seen them spray heavy. Education in what is needed (gained through experience) and knowledge of equipment is a factor here.
Might have quoted wrong guy. lol Sorry Chuck.
Not at all!! I guess I don't know what farmers USED to spray and how much when it comes to pesticides. My thinking is if they go over an entire field with one application of that stuff vs. one application of Round-Up then what would the true difference be other than we don't necessarily know the side effects of one vs. the other.
Difference is in the rates of application. One might be 2% gly and another might be 4% gly. Then comes in the percent of concentrate the gly comes in to you. 47% concentrate applied at 2% solution or 23% gly concentrate at 4% solution. Which one is worse? Then there are other additives. Does it use any surfactant or crop oil? Did farmer blend any other herbicides in with the gly? Lots of factors. Bottom line: if new tilling/plowing methods allow them to use less overall product, it is better long term. This is how I read Sam's post. I threw out some random stuff to make the point. Easier way to look at it? If they use same concentrate and solution percent, but only apply once instead of twice, is it better long term?
Urbanhunter
Junior Member
I laugh because I have been an anti round up on food for years only to be argued with and tried to be discredited by people.. Usually farmers.. WHICH I UNDERSTAND THERE POINT OF VIEW.. Round up ready foods have made farming easier and higher crop production..
Here is some new data.. http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/comp...ller-may-cause-cancer/ar-BBivVfd?ocid=U218DHP
My post #24 somes up things... Glyphosate is found in low levels in our food. lots of our food... You are what you eat
Here is some new data.. http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/comp...ller-may-cause-cancer/ar-BBivVfd?ocid=U218DHP
My post #24 somes up things... Glyphosate is found in low levels in our food. lots of our food... You are what you eat
Last edited:
Just a couple corrections only because I raised chickens (pasture raised) and this is a pet peeve of mine. I am not sticking up for the broiler industry BUT....
1. There are no GMO chickens. Every chicken variety commercially raised right now has been developed through traditional cross breeding.
2. Steroids are illegal to use in all chickens. Nobody uses them. Even if not illegal, because of how chickens are raised they would not be cost effective. If you ever pick up a package of chicken that says "no hormones added" then look around because somewhere on the package will also be a statement that no hormones are used in the production of any poultry.
Antibiotics are another story and their use is being phased out due to consumer demand. I would imagine in 5-10 years there will be very little if any antibiotic used in poultry. (Maybe some classes that are not used in humans will still be allowed.)
That is all.
Carry on.
motorbreaker
*Supporting Member I*
http://gmojudycarman.org/new-study-shows-that-animals-are-seriously-harmed-by-gm-feed/
Found this and thought I'd share.
Found this and thought I'd share.