click on the graphic to view it full size
Graphic from the New York Times
bootstrap analysis: deer browsing and songbirds
I am not sure how this article about the effect of deer browsing and song birds applies to the deer and birds here in the woods. My inclination (without any scientific evidence to refute the Audubon Society) is that white-tails are now on the demonization list of the Audubon, as are domestic cats. In my defense, I haven't seen any scientific evidence from Audubon, either. Only numbers of birds in decline, or numbers of birds eaten by cats (millions and millions?). You can't give me numbers of bird kills or bird habitat lost without telling me how you collect and interpret your data. However, the above graphics are extremely interesting. I have a one in 133 chance of hitting a deer in my car in Vermont, the highest in New England. I am thinking that this "statistic" is derived by making a ratio of the deer population or deer collisions to the car population. Of course, no information is actually given on how this "chance of hitting" number is calculated. Obviously , white-tail overpopulation is a problem — for the deer. In Vermont, the deer are large and healthy. In other states, I am horrified at the condition and small size of the herd. I hope the quality of communicating the problem improves.
Technorati Tags: white-tail deer, Audubon Society, songbirds
_/\_/\_
They are calculating
ReplyDelete(# of registered vehicles]
/ (# of automobile vs wild ruminant collisions)
No interest in loss of life (human or deer), but rather in damage to property (vehicles), which only makes sense, since these are insurance company figures.