Last season, Duke University allowed select archers to hunt deer in select Duke Forest tracts. I run in Duke Forest and I've always wanted to hunt there, too. And a community in Chatham County is considering archers, among other ideas, as a means to control the deer population as it infringes on people and plants.
About this time every year, the topic of deer management is a focus of many in our community. From those that hunt deer to those who wake to find prized flowers nipped or windshields broken, talk of deer is bound to cross your path eventually.
By my own admission, I am neither expert nor spokesperson for any group. I am not a wildlife biologist -- my upbringing is in the country. I grew up learning from my father about hunting. I grew up on a farm, I live on a farm and I have seen the effects deer have on a livelihood and the effects deer have on automobiles, too.
In fact, my grandmother who lives in Oxford took several nice bucks with her automobiles until she finally gave up driving altogether.
My grandmother might just be a better hunter than me.
For this writer, deer management and deer hunting have always been synonymous. I've been asked in various settings, including as a guest speaker, my thoughts about how to manage deer. And, like the position of the Wildlife Resources Commission, I believe hunting is the best management in this state for deer.
There will always be ideas about sterilization and fencing and deterrent techniques. If you heard music coming from our garden this year, it was because the deer don't like country music and we love our tomatoes and okra.
My view about the deer population is really not about the deer population as much as it is about the human population. Really, we have people and homes in places that deer once had just other deer and other wildlife, too. Unlike us people-folk, deer and other critters learn to adapt -- and adaptation means nice flowers and shrubs and a garden without a radio or electric fence.
And, while I agree that hunting deer is the best management plan for this state, I may speak alone in stating that deer hunters may not always follow the best management plans in pursuit of deer.
You see, in our society we live a life of following and wanting instant gratification and success. In every national outdoor magazine and on every outdoor television show, philosophies run no deeper than, "the bigger the better."
It seems that few hunters want to spend valuable time afield to take a doe when a trophy buck may be lurking in the shadows. When the population of deer hunters exploded from the 1980s, bucks became the main target and does were left to fawn year after year after year.
And now in many areas we have a problem.
Hunters want to see fewer does, and so do biologists. Still, many hunters target bucks only and perhaps a single doe each year when our licenses allow us many more does.
And so, when hunters took fewer deer and people invaded places that hunters used to hunt and deer used to live, a precarious imbalance was reached.
I respect that many people do not understand hunting and hunters. And I respect that hunters are not respected by some people.
A writer to the editorial section of this paper remarked about neighbors finding dying deer in their yards with arrows poking out. A member of PETA suggested ten-foot tall fences to keep deer at bay. And a wildlife biologist suggested that hunting is the preferred choice of deer management for this state.
There are a few sides to this debate that I'll share in forthcoming columns. Yet, as long as we continue to invade, the problem may not be that of deer, instead the problem might be hunters and non-hunters alike.
Enjoy your time outdoors.
You may reach Jason Hawkins at hawkinsoutdoors@msn.com.
