Thank you for your great report, “Bowhunting in the ’burbs: Backyard deer-stalking draws fans and foes” (Feb. 16).

Hunting with bow and arrow is called a “sport”? Killing and wounding poor animals is a “sport” in America! When I came to this country 59 years ago, I was horrified! Animals running around with an arrow in their bodies, how horrific!

I’ve lived in Dunwoody for 38 years. I am an old lady that has seen it all. I do not want this in my back yard! You have to be heartless to do such so-called hunting. We invaded those animals’ territory. There is hardly room for them anymore, I understand. This should be done in a humane way. We have to ban bow-and-arrow “hunting.” This is a barbaric way to hunt.

I would like for one of these so-called hunters to have an arrow stick in his body just for them to see how it feels! You can call me cruel!

Caroline Jakob
Dunwoody

8 replies on “Letter: Ban barbaric backyard bowhunting of deer”

  1. When I was stationed in Utah some locals that I befriended took me out bow hunting resulting in one of my companions taking down a deer. It was quite a visceral experience for me, and one that I perceived as being quite a cruel death for the animal.

    Eventually my friends rewarded me with a few jars of potted venison they had prepared, and at a later date after I dined on their fare, I suffered from the worst case of food poisoning that I could ever imagine a human could have contracted, and as I languished, I somehow felt that it must be karma – that the buck’s spirit was taking his revenge upon me.

    I’ve shared that same story with my family, and they doubt that it was food poisoning that I suffered from, but was actually mad cow disease, of which they are convinced that I’m still afflicted with…

          1. I’d agree that this conservative area’s local press could use a liberal voice, albeit this respective newspaper, the Dunwoody Reporter, kindly posts my comments and occasionally publishes my letters; however, I’m so far to the left that I’d have made Che Guevara blush. The only newspaper that ever would have been foolhardy enough to run a column of mine would be the now defunct radical rag “Chicago Seed”. Nope, I’m a man of a different era, and my time has passed.

            “Not heaven itself upon the past has power, but what is done is done, and I have had my hour.” – John Dryden from “An Imitation of Horace”

  2. I couldn’t agree more. While bow hunting may be safer in a suburban setting in that it is less likely to harm a human, it has only a 50% wounding rate—hardly the “humane” killing method most rational people would approve of. Not to mention that killing deer to make people happy is completely unnecessary in the first place. Thanks to the biological process called Carrying Capacity, deer limit their numbers based on a variety of factors including food and water availability, healthy habitat, weather conditions, predator density, mating opportunities, etc. Even when these factors are unbalanced by man (such as putting in yet another half-empty strip mall), deer will respond by reabsorbing embryos to prevent overpopulating under conditions that are unfavorable to fawn recruitment. However, when deer are killed at certain times of the year (during defined hunting seasons) they actually increase their numbers. When a population of deer is pressured by hunting, they respond by holding on to most (if not all) of those embryos to compensate for the losses. This is called the Compensatory Rebound Effect. This is what state biologists refer to as “science” when establishing hunting seasons and zones, and is a way of essentially manufacturing more “product” to increase profitable hunting opportunities. The hunting industry is actually a business model, unbeknownst to the majority of the general public including many hunters.

    Perhaps we can next address the inane coyote killing contest sanctioned by the Georgia DNR which runs March through August (in addition to the 24/7/365 open season we have on these valuable predators). We already know hunters claim deer overpopulate and therefore need to be killed, but then we hear them talk about how coyotes are “decimating their deer herds” and also need to be killed. (Side note to hunters: They’re not YOUR deer—wildlife legally belongs to every citizen of the United States as established by federal law.) So which is it, boys? Either deer are overpopulating and we need to stop killing coyotes to help with this concern, or deer aren’t overpopulating and don’t need to be culled.

    The reason for the conflicting hyperbole is simple: money. The DNR profits from selling hunting licenses to people who enjoy killing, so BOTH animals (and many, many others) will die to keep this business in the black. It’s time we eliminate money from this equation and allow nature to take its course, rebalance, and heal. It will benefit all of us in the long run.

Comments are closed.