Couple to hunter: 'Leave without your dead deer'

There is a dead deer lying about 40 yards beyond Lynn Gorfinkle's back deck. It has been there, with a fatal arrow wound in its side, since Oct..... ... projects that the DEP largely credits for the recoveries of many animal species. Nearly five years ago, Greenwich hired sharpshooters to cull its deer herds , and last month, Stamford's Bartlett Arboretum & Gardens announced that it would hold a ...

[Greer]

It's not nice to call people names...but if you insist on it, Trollinconnec ticut, perhaps you might want to try to understand their reasoning for this. The deer will not just rot - it will be eaten by other wildlife. At least it won't become a trophy on a kitsch decor wall in a hunter's home.

The deer was on their property, they do not allow hunting, nor do they want hunters trespassing on their land. The deer may or may not have been killed on their property, but from the looks of it, it may have been, considering the arrow placement. Where was the arrow? An arrow wouldn't just fall out, would it? It could break off if the deer were to run against anything.....but no one other than that hunter could have removed it - that's why he knew that the deer was dead - he didn't ask to look for an injured deer, he asked whether he could retrieve his dead deer! He had already been on their property illegally!

What's your problem with that? It;'s not like the hunter will starve to death because he didn't get "his" deer...gimme a break!

[Greer]

Trollinginconnecticut wrote:

<quoted text>
Please enlighten us on what natural wildlife will be eating the carcus since you are such an expert. How long will it take? It will become a health hazard.

Get out a dictionary - what's a "carcus" - since I am such an expert, I was able to use my noodle to guess what you meant.

Fo your elightenment, if hunters haven't killed or trapped all of them because of competition, how about any wildlife that happens to eat carcasses? Don't tell me there are no coyotes, etc. in Redding?

And what is it to you - no one should be trespassing on the Gorfinkle's property - it's large enough not to be a health problem to anyone as long as they stay away and don't trespass as that hunter obviously did - how else would he have known that the deer was dead? DUH!

[Atia2]

Greenwich did have that "very special cull" in 2005, but it didn't make one iota of a difference, in fact, there are more deer now than in 2005 - this should prove, once and for all, that hunting doesn't lower deer populations!
The aerial survey conducted in Greenwich on 2-8-05, on the transect above Merritt Parkway which happens to have the highest deer density in town, counted 47 deer per sq/mi. The survey conducted this year, had a reported 60 deer per sq/mi. Does that sound like the cull or any hunting conducted in town has been successful?
It is shameful and deceitful that the DEP and deer committees comprised of so-called experts who have no idea about deer management should prevail in continually brainwashing and lying to the public about the necessity to kill deer in order to lower their numbers.
It will never happen, unless they kill as many deer as was done by commercial hunting in the late 1800s/early 1900s to keep them from rebounding.
But that's NOT the plan - the DEP must keep numbers high enough to satisfy hunters' demands for good hunting opportunities, or else they will lose revenues from hunting licenses.

[Juana]

I empathize with the couple who searched and finally found the dead deer on their property! No one should have to deal with this! I also agree with their decision of not allowing the hunter to retrieve it; at least other wildlife may benefit from this young buck’s death instead of having his head on a wall as a trophy!
I remember the 2005 Greenwich "cull" very well. It was rammed down our throats with testimonies from a parade of mothers with their children and uninformed doctors at a RTM meeting where only deer were blamed for Lyme disease.
In fact, I know several RTM members who felt bamboozled into voting for this travesty after learning more balanced views on this issue.
Residents are slowly beginning to realize that killing deer does not eradicate Lyme disease - it's the black-legged tick (NOT deer tick)! Dozens of small mammals are reservoirs for the spirochete bacterium, most noteworthy is the white-footed mouse (NOT deer mouse)! Black-legged ticks are the ONLY vectors capable of transmitting the bacterium to others; eliminate the ticks, and the spirochete bacterium harboring mammals will be rendered completely harmless! How simple is that? No more ticks searching for hosts!
It doesn't matter how many deer are killed, their population will rebound to the same number or more than the year before - hasn't anyone noticed that killing continues every year, and strangely, deer numbers aren't going down? Could that possibly be by design? Hmmmmm

[The Real Lulz]

You guys do realize that hunting isn't just about trophies, right? Maybe the head would wind up on the wall but most hunters I know eat what they kill.

As far as this hunter trespassing on the Gorfinkle's property, hunters have a responsibility to track the animals they shoot and make sure the deer is dead. In my opinion, he did the right thing. He went to make sure the deer had died and then contacted the home owner to ask if he could retrieve the deer. When the homeowner said no, which is their right, it was over and he didn't cause a fight (as far as I know, no cops were called to the scene). He did everything absolutely right.

Now, onto the Gorfinkles. Claims that the hunter hunted on their private land may be true but deer shot with a bow and arrow can run for a long time before succumbing to their wounds. It's not pretty but that's part of hunting and a part of life. It is entirely possible that a deer was shot well into lands that allow hunting only for him to run onto private land that does not allow hunting.

What bothers me about this is that Mrs. Gorfinkle is a well known anti-hunting "crusader". I'm sure she was right on the phone with local reporters when this happened. For someone who has such a problem with a hunter capitalizing on his kill, she has no such qualms about using the kill for publicity. Kind of a hypocrite.

[Mark M]

Private property is private property. NO HUNTING signs are to obeyed, or suffer the consequences. Bow hunting is one of the cruelest forms of hunting, with even hunters acknowledging this fact.

More of the same attempt at brainwashing the pubic - that hunting reduces herd numbers. What the DEP and hunters DO NOT tell you is that the numbers next year will be INCREASED due to Compensatory Rebound Effect.

Hunting is not a 'heritage'; not a 'tradition'; and has no place in the twenty-first century.

[Atia2]

The Real Lulz wrote:
"What bothers me about this is that Mrs. Gorfinkle is a well known anti-hunting "crusader". I'm sure she was right on the phone with local reporters when this happened. For someone who has such a problem with a hunter capitalizing on his kill, she has no such qualms about using the kill for publicity. Kind of a hypocrite."

In fact, she did NOT call a reporter; instead of being so bothered by it, it might behoove you to know what you're talking about before you spew such nonsense!

The real hypocrisy is the senseless killing of deer under the ruse of "game management", which is supposed to pass as wildlife management (which it isn't),not Ms. Gorfinkle's coming to the defense of animals whose herds are managed to propagate in order to supply a nice renewable resource for hunters!

[anneutral]

I'm not really getting the 'natural predator' thing.
Since the eradication of wolves in this area,'Man' is the natural predator.
Sadly, this animal will rot where is lies, and will become nothing more than a maggot factory.
Maybe a coyote will find it, maybe not, either way, it's a waste.
-
As for 'culling the herd', as we did here in Greenwich, that is the stupidest thing we've ever been a party to, it was nothing more than a baited slaughter.
The following year we had more deer than ever, because deer herds naturally repopulate themselves.
-
For many people hunting is a way to fill your freezer for the coming winter, and for the real conservationist, it's the right way. Buying hormone fed meat from the market is a waste, when you can have a deer butchered, wrapped and frozen.
-
Too bad she didn't call the local food bank, and have them retrieve the carcass, as they do for 'roadkill' in a few states.

[Atia2]

Teasle wrote:

<quoted text>Or we can just kill them in greater numbers year after year.They're delicious!!

Apparently you know nothing about wildlife biology or you wouldn't wouln't be cutting off your nose to spite your face!

[Trollinginconnec ticut]

What's the matter greer, cat gou your tongue?.....LOL

[Trollinginconnec ticut]

anneutral wrote:

I'm not really getting the 'natural predator' thing.
Since the eradication of wolves in this area,'Man' is the natural predator.
Sadly, this animal will rot where is lies, and will become nothing more than a maggot factory.
Maybe a coyote will find it, maybe not, either way, it's a waste.
-
As for 'culling the herd', as we did here in Greenwich, that is the stupidest thing we've ever been a party to, it was nothing more than a baited slaughter.
The following year we had more deer than ever, because deer herds naturally repopulate themselves.
-
For many people hunting is a way to fill your freezer for the coming winter, and for the real conservationist, it's the right way. Buying hormone fed meat from the market is a waste, when you can have a deer butchered, wrapped and frozen.
-
Too bad she didn't call the local food bank, and have them retrieve the carcass, as they do for 'roadkill' in a few states.

I don't think that roadkill can be used for food. The damage that is done to the internal organs make it inedible

[A word of reason]

I know several hunters and none of them would participate in word to word combat with the likes of Teasle and Trollinginconec ticut. Did you have to go to the dictionary to spell the "f" word too! You show your ignorance with every entry on this blog. Everyone is entitled to their personal beliefs and certainly if the hunter was following some hunter's code by tracking the wounded deer and needed to on the Gorfinkles property to do so, then he should have knocked on their door and asked permission FIRST. He was trespassing and the fact that they are Animal Rights Advocates has nothing to do with the law. When that hunter put a foot on their property without permission he broke the law. The hunters I know do use the meat to feed their families and still hunt with integrity. They don't take more than what their permits allow, they don't practice their bow skills in the woods where someone could be injured or killed and they don't take shot unless it is a good mark. No matter what side of the issue you are on...when you show your ignorance like this you give hunters a bad name and when you lie with rats you always come away with fleas!

[Trollinginconnec ticut]

Trollinginconnecticut wrote:

What's the matter greer, cat gou your tongue?.....LOL

OMG I misspelled got....Call the spelling police

[Greer]

Trollinginconnecticut wrote:

What's the matter greer, cat gou your tongue?.....LOL

There is a slight difference between a typo and misspelling, as you have done in this one.

[A word of reason]

By the way the baited slaughter that took place in Greenwich several years ago cost the tax payers over $80,000+ for 80 deer. It was the most blood curdling event to have taken place while White Buffalo considered professional marksmen...I heard had to finish off some of the unsuspecting deer by putting plastic bags over their heads to suffocate them to death. Very humane.

[Trollinginconnec ticut]

Mark M wrote:

Private property is private property. NO HUNTING signs are to obeyed, or suffer the consequences. Bow hunting is one of the cruelest forms of hunting, with even hunters acknowledging this fact.
More of the same attempt at brainwashing the pubic - that hunting reduces herd numbers. What the DEP and hunters DO NOT tell you is that the numbers next year will be INCREASED due to Compensatory Rebound Effect.
Hunting is not a 'heritage'; not a 'tradition'; and has no place in the twenty-first century.

The hunting did not take place on private property, Get your facts straight.
http://www.connpost.com/localnews/ci_13576841

[A word of reason]

Trollinginconnecticut wrote:

<quoted text>
http://www.connpost.com/localnews/ci_13576841
The hunter knocked on the door and asked permission to remove the deer from the property, where it had finally collapsed, she said.
Get you facts straight before you criticize. Now shutthefuck up and come back when you know ALL the facts.
BTW
I don't hunt.

Love your vocabulary! How old are you? Just learn how to use profane words! Thank God you are not a hunter...just think, you with a bow & arrow in hand in the woods...it would be as bad as your ability to read. The hunter had to already have found the deer dead on the their property before he went to the door to ask permission to remove it. He didn't ask permission to search their property. Trollinginconnecticut...you are just trying to mask the issue by being obnoxious.

[The Real Lulz]

Atia2 wrote:

The Real Lulz wrote:
"What bothers me about this is that Mrs. Gorfinkle is a well known anti-hunting "crusader". I'm sure she was right on the phone with local reporters when this happened. For someone who has such a problem with a hunter capitalizing on his kill, she has no such qualms about using the kill for publicity. Kind of a hypocrite."
In fact, she did NOT call a reporter; instead of being so bothered by it, it might behoove you to know what you're talking about before you spew such nonsense!
The real hypocrisy is the senseless killing of deer under the ruse of "game management", which is supposed to pass as wildlife management (which it isn't),not Ms. Gorfinkle's coming to the defense of animals whose herds are managed to propagate in order to supply a nice renewable resource for hunters!

She sure has no problem using the animal's death for her own gain. That's the point.

Senseless killing? First off, no one said this hunter shot this deer for game management. For all we know, he was just hunting for the meat and sport.

Deer have no natural predators left. Coyotes are around but not in large numbers. To take down a deer, coyotes need to hunt in packs and I've never seen a pack of coyotes around here. It's mostly solitary or small groups.

Look at the shores of Cape Cod and the surrounding areas. For the longest time, you couldn't really find seals there. They were gone.

Now the place is choked up with seals because they're protected by law and the main predator, the great white shark, had been decimated by us. Seal numbers have exploded. The great whites are coming back and the seal population is still out of control there. This is what is going to happen with deer down here. Deer numbers are going to skyrocket.

I don't think hunting is the sole solution either but combined with bringing back natural predators, it will work.

[The Real Lulz]

A word of reason wrote:

<quoted text>
Love your vocabulary! How old are you? Just learn how to use profane words! Thank God you are not a hunter...just think, you with a bow & arrow in hand in the woods...it would be as bad as your ability to read. The hunter had to already have found the deer dead on the their property before he went to the door to ask permission to remove it. He didn't ask permission to search their property. Trollinginconnecticut...you are just trying to mask the issue by being obnoxious.

That's because the hunter has a responsibility to find a downed deer. Once located, he went to the house and did the right thing by asking to retrieve the carcass.

If he had shot the deer and just gave up his search, you people would be ranting and raving about how another careless hunter just shot a deer and left it.

[Greer]

Trollinginconnecticut wrote:

<quoted text>
http://www.connpost.com/localnews/ci_13576841
The hunter knocked on the door and asked permission to remove the deer from the property, where it had finally collapsed, she said.
Get you facts straight before you criticize. Now shutthefuck up and come back when you know ALL the facts.
BTW
I don't hunt.

Au contraire, it is you who should get his facts straight.

The hunter knocked on the door and asked to retrieve "his DEAD DEER", how would he know that? He could NOT have known it was dead from where he supposedly shot it. He also must have removed the arrow before asking to enter the property, which is considered trespassing. The deer was lying on the side of the arrow entry, but no arrow!

How sad that you don't know how to express yourself without using profanities ad infinitum!